Instigator / Pro
25
1495
rating
6
debates
33.33%
won
Topic
#955
Black Lives Matter brainwashes peoples' minds to make them hate whites.
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
Better arguments
9
9
Better sources
8
8
Better legibility
4
4
Better conduct
4
1
After 4 votes and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
DarthVader1
Tags
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 30,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
22
1476
rating
16
debates
40.63%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Pro
#1
Black lives matter doesn’t really care about black lives. It’s more of a movement for attention, money, and like most activism, more money. To achieve these goals they focus only on cases of black men killed by the police. Some of this stuff is tough to listen to. Some of this stuff is not pleasant. It’s not the kind of thing that you want to discuss over cocktails. But it’s important to understand the problem if you’re going to fix it, which Black Lives Matter definitely can’t.
Based on 2012 numbers it would take 40 years of blacks killed by police to equal the total number of blacks murdered by other blacks in a single year. Less than 400 people a year are killed by cops, 61% of them are white men. 32% are black males. Black men are not killed out of proportion when you consider they’re much more likely to interact with police. People are killed by police about as often as they’re struck by lightning but I don’t see many protests about storms. Black males are 58% of those killed legally by private citizens in self defense,except 75% of them were killed by other blacks.
FBI statistics on murder lay bare the real threat to black lives in America, and that is other blacks. Black men are about 6.5% of the U.S population but they commit 52% of all murders. That has dipped to about 40% in recent years. Black men overwhelmingly murder other black people, and white people overwhelmingly murder other white people. So just like abuse and harassment on the internet this isn’t really a racial issue like that isn’t really a gendered issue.
Looking at overall violent crime blacks are 27% more likely to attack whites than vice versa, and 8 times more likely to attack Hispanics.
90% of blacks that die of murder die at the hands of other black people, and that’s from the FBI homicide report. 90%. We’re not here to talk about why this happens, why 74% of black children are raised without fathers, per health and human services, and why the government seems intent on continuing a cycle of destruction in the black community. Black lives don’t matter to black lives matter. If they did, they’d be confronting these issues instead of ignoring them completely.
Black Lives Matter tries to turn young men like Michael Brown and Jamar Clark into martyrs but these guys aren’t angels. It reminds me of the UVA rape case, feminism’s flagship battle in the fight against the supposed rape epidemic on campus. Except of course it wasn’t true. Neither was the Duke Lacrosse case. Neither was Emma solkowitz at the university of Columbia; mattress girl. All of these marquee and flagship cases seem to turn out to be hoaxes. The best examples they can come up with, in fact, are hoaxes. And Black Lives Matter’s leadership is a disgrace. This Shaun king, who isn’t even black. And, you know, let’s see what comes out in the press about all that charity money but I think we know what’s happened to that. Deray is better known for his vest than any actual achievements, and lesser stars like Charles wade who was arrested for prostitution and allegedly is also a charity scammer.
If Black Lives Matter were conservative, it would already be one of the most discredited and despised movements in American history. Can you imagine the elite Left’s reaction to a conservative movement built on a founding lie that has incited riots, inspired shootings of police, and correlated with an astounding and deadly increase in violent crime in America’s major cities?
Con
#2
The true purpose of Black Lives Matter (BLM) | (I am black)
Some people tend to have many misconceptions about Black Lives Matter. They think BLM means that other lives don't, when that is not the case. BLM means that black lives matter too. It isn't an anti white movement, it's a pro black movement. We aren't saying that black lives are more meaningful than everyone else's, we are saying black lives are just as meaningful as everyone else's. The BLM movement isn't about separation, segregation or disengagement. The BLM movement is about a positive resolution. Whether you believe it or not our lives are jeopardized every single day, and we are doing nothing more than bringing awareness to that. And by claiming that blacks shouldn't be apart of BLM and that it doesn't help black people is an act of disassociation from black people to equality which is what our movement is all about. This leads to the belittlement, patronizing, and mocking of the black struggle. All of this goes along perfectly well with what Martin Luther King Jr. has done and dreamed of. "Black lives matter doesn’t really care about black lives." - that sentence is quite counter-intuitive, and makes zero sense. As for why, there's really need to explain as it is pretty self explanatory. So is this sentence, "Black lives don’t matter to black lives matter." The purpose of BLM isn't to hate whites or to get brainwashed into hating whites. Fun fact, before BLM even existed, black people hated whites because of how they treated them. Look at slavery. There is no brainwash. Racism is still unfortunately alive and well today.
Definitions
Black Lives Matter - (BLM) is an international activist movement, originating in the African-American community, that campaigns against violence and systemic racism towards black people.
Police brutality - is a civil rights violation that occurs when a police officer acts with excessive force by using an amount of force with regards to a civilian that is more than necessary. Excessive force by a law enforcement officers is a violation of a person's rights.
To achieve these goals they focus only on cases of black men killed by the police.
I mean, what else is there to focus on?
61% of them are white men. 32% are black males.
And which ones are documented more?
Black men are not killed out of proportion when you consider they’re much more likely to interact with police.
Why do you think they're more likely to interact with police? Ding ding ding, racism and oppression.
People are killed by police about as often as they’re struck by lightning but I don’t see many protests about storms.
Comparing police brutality to nature is inaccurate. You can't help how the weather operates, it's unforeseen circumstances, but what can be helped and changed is how police are acting. They are overusing and abusing their authority. At the end of the day they are human beings just like the general public are. Guns and badges are given to the wrong people (some) I'm not saying all cops because yes, there are some good cops. Unfortunately they are being shadowed from the negativity of all the shitty cops. They are too trigger happy. They love to kill now and ask questions later.
I feel as though you are steering off topic.
- "Black on black crime and white on white crime." Irrelevant
- "Black men committing 52% of all the murders." - Irrelevant
- "Black children raised without fathers" - Irrelevant
Let's stick with the debate topic at hand. It's about BLM. What do all of those have to do with this? Especially the black children raised without fathers? This is mainly about police brutality.
Black Lives Matter tries to turn young men like Michael Brown and Jamar Clark into martyrs but these guys aren’t angels.
Despite their past, at the end of the day a life was still lost. Let's take a look at these black people then. Eric Garner (pleading for his life and they continued to suffocate him) Tamir Rice (ridiculous), John Crawford lll (One of the worst ever. From holding a BB gun INSIDE a Walmart), Philando Castile and more.
Incited riots, inspired shootings of police, and correlated with an astounding and deadly increase in violent crime in America’s major cities?
Well black people have taken so much for a very long time and we are constantly told to let it go and not do anything. People have gotten tired of the injustices so they snapped. Is it necessarily right? No. But what do you expect? Peace should be the best solution. But with the constant killings of blacks, a limit will be reached again and again.
Source:
John Crawford - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_John_Crawford_III - Crawford picked up an un-packaged BB/pellet air rifle inside the store's sporting goods section and continued shopping in the store. Another customer, Ronald Ritchie, called 911. According to Ritchie at the time, Crawford was pointing the gun at people and at children walking by, and messing with the gun. Security camera footage showed that Crawford was talking on his cellphone and holding the B.B. gun as he shopped, but at no point did he aim the B.B. gun at anyone. After the security camera footage was released, Ritchie recanted his statement that led to the fatal shooting and stated, "At no point did he shoulder the rifle and point it at somebody", while maintaining that Crawford was "waving it around". Two officers of the Beavercreek Police arrived at the Walmart shortly after their dispatcher informed them of a "subject with a gun" in the pet supplies area of the store. Sean Williams, one of the two police officers that arrived, shot Crawford in the arm and chest. He was later pronounced dead at Dayton's Miami Valley Hospital.
Round 2
Pro
#3
Of course blacks shouldn't be with BLM. Does the BLM make the black people aware that 90% of black people killed are by the hands of other black people? No.
Does the BLM tell the black people that 74% of black children grow without fathers because they are born out of wedlock? Does it do anything to stop that? No.
Does the BLM tell the black people that black kids are not graduating out of high school and dropping out? Does the BLM do anything to change that? No.
Does the BLM tell the black people that it would take 40 years of blacks killed by police to equal the total number of blacks murdered by other blacks in a single year? No.
Does the BLM tell the black people that blacks are 6.5% of the US population and yet commit 40% of the murders? No.
America is definitely not more racist now than it was in the 1960s. If the problem with blacks is because of their race and not their culture,then why did the single motherhood rate of the black community jump from 20% to 70%? Does the BLM do anything to stop that? No.
The BLM has a simple agenda: Ignoring the real problems of the black community and shifting the focus to hating white people. They blame all their problems on racism. The reason they can't get a job or education is not because they are a bunch of self-entitled babies who think everything should be handed to them on a silver platter,but because of racism. Everything wrong with them is racism. Nothing is their own fault.
If black people mattered to BLM,they would be trying to confront these issues,instead of making up a fantasy demon called "racism" and pitting the blacks against whites.
Whites hated blacks because of slavery? Whites also freed them. Whites brought in the Civil Rights Act. Whites voted in a black president. Does slavery exist anymore? No. Come to think of it,blacks hated whites too. Remember the Black Panthers? No matter what,slavery and Black Panthers doesn't exist anymore. Yet the BLM deliberately deludes the black community to gain power.
What are you trying to prove by posting definitions of BLM and "police brutality"? Just because you believe in something doesn't mean it exists. According to the FBI,there are less than 400 deaths a year through cop murder. 61% are whites,32% are blacks. I am failing to see the "brutality" here.
There are a lot of other issues to focus on------loose characters and morals in the black community,more black children being born out of wedlock, 90% of blacks killed by blacks,blacks dropping out of high school,etc. These are issues that should be tackled and solved instead of focusing on a fantasy monster called "racism".
Out of 17284 murders in the USA in 2017,6913 were committed by blacks. Do you seriously think that ALL 6913 blacks were victims of racism? Is the FBI racist too?
Once again,less than 400 people are killed by police each year. 61% are white,32% are blacks. What's the brutality here? Where's the trigger happy people? Oh yes,if you want to say that the 90% blacks who were killed by other blacks are trigger happy,I can accept that.
Black on black crime is very relevant to the debate because it proves that the BLM doesn't care about the problems blacks have from people of their own community. The BLM never highlights the black-on-black crime facts,because then its agenda would be exposed and it would be proved that the BLM has not done anything to make the black people aware of the problems facing them: Loose morals and bad culture.
Black people committing 52% of all the murder is very relevant because it shows that blacks are not victims,but actually the criminals themselves.....something BLM would never tell you.
The BLM has brainwashed your mind by teaching you a word which doesn't mean anything: police brutality. The problem is not racism,but bad culture. 74% of black children are born out of wedlock and are raised without fathers. Don't you think that impacts their childhood at all? Don't you think that may be one of the reasons of their bad upbringing? What does the BLM do to combat that? Nothing,because it's too busy to fight the imaginary monster called "police brutality".
What about the lives of people lost in the Rodney King and countless other riots? Don't they matter? A constant killing of blacks is taking place.....except it's done by other blacks,not the police,despite what the BLM might say.
Sources:
Even black people themselves admit that black-on black crime is a bigger problem than racism. Does the BLM speak about this? No.
As the above link shows,white people are killed by police more or less the same as black people. Does the BLM speak about this? No.
The above link is the link which shows that 90% of blacks are killed by other blacks,not police. Does the BLM speak about this? No.
The BLM is brainwashing black people and teaching them not to focus on bettering their lives and improving their character,instead just blame it on the police and the white man.
Martin Luther King said,"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Well....black people are being judged by the content of their character......when they have children out of wedlock,drop out of schools,indulge in shootings and commit riots.
Con
#4
Does the BLM make the black people aware that 90% of black people killed are by the hands of other black people? No.
I agree that this issue does need to be tackled and black on black crime is not right. Even though black on black crimes and BLM is linked, they are separate. Like I said before you are steering off topic rather than exclusively focusing on BLM which is what the debate topic is about. What you are merely doing is villainizing black people. Nothing new, it's as expected. We've dealt with this forever and are continuing to deal with it. How come white on white crimes are being swept under the rug and you act as if white people are so perfect?
1) Classic case of white privilege.
Does the BLM tell the black people that 74% of black children grow without fathers because they are born out of wedlock? Does it do anything to stop that?
This has absolutely nothing to do with BLM. Black children growing up without fathers can't be helped. Unfortunately that's been happening for a long time. How about fathers being responsible for their children and taking care of them rather than leaving them and actually being fathers. Don't point to BLM (an activist group) that has nothing to do with this. Do you know how many people in relationships (out of wedlock) have children? A LOT. This includes white people and plenty other races. Not just black people. There are fathers who stay and take care of their kids even before marriage like they are supposed to do. You can't blame black people for another person (their father) for not being there. That's the father's fault, not the child's fault. They never asked to come into the world. Newsflash, there are white people who grew up without fathers. Somehow that's unaddressed, how ironic.
2) Classic case of white privilege.
Does the BLM tell the black people that black kids are not graduating out of high school and dropping out? Does the BLM do anything to change that?
Another point that has absolutely nothing to do with BLM. Irrelevant. This is beyond BLM's hands. Oh yeah, did you know that white people do the exact same thing? It's tons of white people that drop out, but people see them as so innocent because what, you may ask? White privilege.
3) Classic case of white privilege.
Does the BLM tell the black people that blacks are 6.5% of the US population and yet commit 40% of the murders? No.
Nice job pushing the racism agenda and stereotypes. This fact may be unfortunately true, but the "dropping out of high school" and "growing up without a father" are stereotypes and simply irrelevant. Has nothing to do with BLM. Oh, white people commit more mass shootings. What black person do you see shooting up schools all of the time? None. They are all white. Oh, but I bet you give that a pass right?
4) Classic case of white privilege.
If the problem with blacks is because of their race and not their culture,then why did the single motherhood rate of the black community jump from 20% to 70%? Does the BLM do anything to stop that? No.
The BLM can't do anything to stop that, it's beyond anyone's control. A group is not responsible for someone else's failure as a parent. Solution should be is that more people need to be responsible with their children.
The BLM has a simple agenda: Ignoring the real problems of the black community and shifting the focus to hating white people. They blame all their problems on racism. The reason they can't get a job or education is not because they are a bunch of self-entitled babies who think everything should be handed to them on a silver platter,but because of racism. Everything wrong with them is racism. Nothing is their own fault.
And why do you think there is hatred of white people? Because of racism and oppression. I think you're treating racism as some small problem and as if it doesn't exist. You claim it was more serious in the 1960's, but that doesn't matter. Like I said, racism is still alive and well. today "The reason they can't get a job or education" - here we go with the stereotypes again. Be careful with that because you're putting all black people in one box which is wrong. Racism is actually the reason why black people can't get jobs or it being harder for them to get jobs. If a black person has the same qualifications and credentials as a white person that's applying for a job, more than likely that white person will be hired. Black sounding names are more than likely denied on job applications.
5) White people don't have to worry about the texture of their hair, the color of their skin color or their cultural accessories as the reason why they didn't get a job.
If black people mattered to BLM, they would be trying to confront these issues, instead of making up a fantasy demon called "racism" and pitting the blacks against whites.
Not only did you call racism a fantasy as if it doesn't exist, but you put quotation marks around it. Interesting. One of the main reasons BLM exists (other than police brutality) is because of racism. Blacks being against whites has been happening forever. Know why? White supremacy. White supremacy also ties into white privilege.
6) White Supremacy - The belief that white people are superior to those of all other races, especially the black race, and should therefore dominate society.
Does slavery exist anymore? No.
But it existed.
7) White people don't have to worry about being told to get over slavery, or Jim Crow, or segregation in schools, and jobs, as if it does not affect every single aspect of their life to this day.
What are you trying to prove by posting definitions of BLM and "police brutality"? Just because you believe in something doesn't mean it exists. According to the FBI,there are less than 400 deaths a year through cop murder. 61% are whites,32% are blacks. I am failing to see the "brutality" here.
I set a definition for BLM because you clearly have a misconception about it. I also set a definition for police brutality because somehow it seems you are sweeping it under the rug as if it doesn't exist when there are countless cases of black men being victims of this. Source: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2018/03/29/police-killings-black-men-us-and-what-happened-officers/469467002/
To address your "61% are whites, 32% are blacks", check this out: Washington Post - "Aren’t more white people than black people killed by police? Yes, but no." https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/07/11/arent-more-white-people-than-black-people-killed-by-police-yes-but-no/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.333b656c0678
8) White people don't have to worry about having a talk with their children about obeying police officers and following their every command or their life could be gone.
9) White people don't have to worry about informing their children of the harsh realities of systematic racism.
Loose characters and morals in the black community,more black children being born out of wedlock, 90% of blacks killed by blacks,blacks dropping out of high school,etc. These are issues that should be tackled and solved instead of focusing on a fantasy monster called "racism".
Rebutted. "loose characters and morals" - here we go again with the stereotypes and the villainizing.
What's the brutality here? Where's the trigger happy people?
The police are the trigger happy people, which can be easily proven. Classic case, John Crawford lll.
Loose morals and bad culture.
Bad culture now? Wow, I wonder what's next. Keep the stereotypes coming.
10) White people don't have to worry about what they wear or how they act or how they carry themselves without being labeled a thug or a gangster.
11) White people don't have too worry about being monitored in stores just because the shade of their skin is a bit darker than most.
The BLM has brainwashed your mind by teaching you a word which doesn't mean anything: police brutality. The problem is not racism,but bad culture. 74% of black children are born out of wedlock and are raised without fathers. Don't you think that impacts their childhood at all? Don't you think that may be one of the reasons of their badupbringing? What does the BLM do to combat that? Nothing,because it's too busy to fight the imaginary monster called "police brutality".
First racism is imaginary, now police brutality? It doesn't mean anything either? Interesting. Like I said before, there is no brainwashing. This is reality. The problem is racism. Being born out of wedlock, dropping out of school and raised without fathers are not black people's faults. If it does impact their childhood, it isn't their fault. I grew up without a father and I'm just fine. I have a job and I have an education. You say they might have a bad upbringing, but that does not apply to every single black person who grew up without a father. Again, you are conveniently forgetting the fact that there are white people that drop out, grew up without fathers and born out of wedlock.
12) Classic case of white privilege.
Even black people themselves admit that black-on black crime is a bigger problem than racism. Does the BLM speak about this? No.
Rebutted in beginning of argument.
As the above link shows,white people are killed by police more or less the same as black people. Does the BLM speak about this? No.
Rebutted with link about the Washington Post link.
The above link is the link which shows that 90% of blacks are killed by other blacks,not police. Does the BLM speak about this? No.
Rebutted.
The BLM is brainwashing black people and teaching them not to focus on bettering their lives and improving their character,instead just blame it on the police and the white man.
It's not brainwashing. "bettering lives" and "improving character" you're perpetuating more stereotypes. You might as well could have made a "Black people need to "change" debate instead of a BLM debate. Again, you are putting all black people in one box when there are black people different from each other. The white man IS to blame.
13) White people don't have to worry about being articulate and well spoken without people being surprised.
Well....black people are being judged by the content of their character......
And why do you think that? It's racism. Stop putting so much of the blame towards black people. Black people have taken so much like I said before, and people expect us to just take it. Everyone has their limits. When black people stand up for themselves and express what's right, then it becomes a problem?
When they have children out of wedlock,drop out of schools,indulge in shootings and commit riots.
So do white people.
14) Classic case of white privilege.
Round 3
Pro
#5
1.
"DEALING WITH THIS"
Well,if you dealt with black-on-black crime instead of being paranoid about what non-blacks would say,you would have dealt with that issue long ago. This actually has a lot to do with BLM because it claims to stand for black lives and yet never protects them from their biggest threats........black people themselves.
Also,of course,white on white crime exists. Nobody denies it,even though black-on-black crime is significantly higher than white-on-white crime. We don't ignore it and blame it on "racism". We find out ways to defend ourselves. We buy guns,train using them and then use them for our defense. The problem with BLM is that they don't do anything to combat black-on-black crime. They instead blame the white man for everything,which proves that Black Lives don't matter to Black Lives Matter.
2. "DADDY ISSUES"
So,as I expected,you spew out rhetoric without any facts. Almost every sentence in your 1st argument is a lie. Let's start:
Black kids growing up without fathers has not been happening for a very long time. You'll be shocked to know that under the Jim Crow laws and the 1960s,the number of black children growing up without fathers was 22%. Still high,but microscopic compared to the 59% in 1980 and the 57.6% now. Only a loss in character and morals can explain that. (Popenoe, David. Life Without Father (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996), 23.)
The issue of white fathers leaving their parents is unaddressed because it happens the least out of Blacks,Hispanics and whites. As of today,the rate of black fathers leaving their kids is 48.5%,those of Hispanics 26.3% and those of whites 18.3%. (US Census Bureau, “Living Arrangements of Children Under 18”: Tables –CH-2, CH-3, CH-4. 1960 – Present. U.S. Census Bureau July 1, 2012.)
"BLM has nothing to do with this." Oh,that's right,I forgot. Black Lives Matter only cares BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION,NOT OTHER BLACK LIVES. I'm sorry. My bad.My bad.
3. "SCHOOL IS FOR THE BIRDS"
Another lie. A noble lie,but a lie all the same.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2005-mar-24-me-graduate24-story.html
The above link show studies conducted by Harvard University and Urban Institute which shows nearly half of the Latino and African American students who should have graduated from California high schools in 2002 failed to complete their education. Just 57% of African Americans and 60% of Latinos graduated in 2002, compared with 78% of whites and 84% of Asians. Now,this is just for only one state. One can only imagine about the rest of the country. People don't talk about whites on this issue,because of "white privilege". They don't because whites don't drop out of schools at the abysmal rate as blacks.
"BLM has nothing to do with this." Oh,that's right,I forgot once again. Black Lives Matter only cares BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION,NOT OTHER BLACK LIVES. I'm sorry. My bad.My bad.
4. "MURDER? I'M BLACK,YOU RACIST!"
Again,as expected,you labeled proven facts of the FBI about blacks committing the most amount of murders as "racism agenda and stereotypes". The dropping out of high school and born out of wedlock are actually true,as I proved above with FACTS. It's very relevant as it shows how the BLM cares SO MUCH about the black lives lost in those cases,and how it is doing SO MUCH to help them. Also,according to the same WASHINGTON POST whose sources you posted,mass shootings account for a tiny amount of deaths in the USA.
How about riots? Be it Rodney King,Ferguson,Milwaukee,Chicago riots,every major riot in this country has been instigated by BLM,who believe violence is the answer when it should not even be a question.
5. "YOU'RE RACIST IF YOU CRITICIZE BLACKS,BUT YOU'RE EMPOWERING IF YOU CRITICIZE WHITES"
You just now admitted that there is hatred of white people among BLM. You literally wrote that in your 4th point. So,because some people used to keep slaves in the past,then that means that their sons and daughters should undergo the hate and revenge? Glad you cleared that up. Of course,it matters that America is not as racist as it was in the 1960s. It shows that the civil rights movement has reached so high to stop racism without the BLM's frantic efforts to revive it.
I already proved that blacks are dropping out of high school in higher rates than whites above with FACTS,which some BLM activists call "STEREOTYPE".
The idea that black people in the United States are disproportionately poor because America is racist; that’s just not true, at least not in terms of America’s racism today keeping black people down. It’s just not the case. If that were the case then you’d have to look at group income, and decide based on group income who’s been victimized the most, and who the country was built for. By that standard, the country was built by Asians, because the racial group with the highest median income in the United States is Asians. The Constitution was not written by a bunch of people who speak Korean. Because the Constitution is a document of freedom, not a document of ethnicity.
So here are the three rules. You want to be rich in America; you want to do well in America? Put aside the whining about the system.
According to the Brookings Institute, 2% of Americans who followed these rules are in poverty. 75% have joined the middle class. What about racism? 71% of poor families with children are unmarried. The poverty rate among non-married white families was 22% in 2008; that same year the poverty rate among black married couples was less than 7%.
But what happened to racism? Why weren’t those black married couples poorer than the single white moms? Because it doesn’t have to do with color; it has to do with life decisions.
Well,shouldn't the BLM be concerned about the single motherhood rate? Couldn't the BLM decide solutions about that? Couldn't BLM make black people aware of that?
Oh,that's right,I forgot once again. WHAT IN GOD'S NAME IS THE MATTER WITH ME? Black Lives Matter only cares BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION,NOT OTHER BLACK LIVES. I'm sorry. My bad.My bad.
6. "IT MUST BE THE WHITE SUPREMACY"
Well,if you dealt with black-on-black crime instead of being paranoid about what non-blacks would say,you would have dealt with that issue long ago. This actually has a lot to do with BLM because it claims to stand for black lives and yet never protects them from their biggest threats........black people themselves.
Also,of course,white on white crime exists. Nobody denies it,even though black-on-black crime is significantly higher than white-on-white crime. We don't ignore it and blame it on "racism". We find out ways to defend ourselves. We buy guns,train using them and then use them for our defense. The problem with BLM is that they don't do anything to combat black-on-black crime. They instead blame the white man for everything,which proves that Black Lives don't matter to Black Lives Matter.
2. "DADDY ISSUES"
So,as I expected,you spew out rhetoric without any facts. Almost every sentence in your 1st argument is a lie. Let's start:
Black kids growing up without fathers has not been happening for a very long time. You'll be shocked to know that under the Jim Crow laws and the 1960s,the number of black children growing up without fathers was 22%. Still high,but microscopic compared to the 59% in 1980 and the 57.6% now. Only a loss in character and morals can explain that. (Popenoe, David. Life Without Father (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996), 23.)
The issue of white fathers leaving their parents is unaddressed because it happens the least out of Blacks,Hispanics and whites. As of today,the rate of black fathers leaving their kids is 48.5%,those of Hispanics 26.3% and those of whites 18.3%. (US Census Bureau, “Living Arrangements of Children Under 18”: Tables –CH-2, CH-3, CH-4. 1960 – Present. U.S. Census Bureau July 1, 2012.)
"BLM has nothing to do with this." Oh,that's right,I forgot. Black Lives Matter only cares BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION,NOT OTHER BLACK LIVES. I'm sorry. My bad.My bad.
3. "SCHOOL IS FOR THE BIRDS"
Another lie. A noble lie,but a lie all the same.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2005-mar-24-me-graduate24-story.html
The above link show studies conducted by Harvard University and Urban Institute which shows nearly half of the Latino and African American students who should have graduated from California high schools in 2002 failed to complete their education. Just 57% of African Americans and 60% of Latinos graduated in 2002, compared with 78% of whites and 84% of Asians. Now,this is just for only one state. One can only imagine about the rest of the country. People don't talk about whites on this issue,because of "white privilege". They don't because whites don't drop out of schools at the abysmal rate as blacks.
"BLM has nothing to do with this." Oh,that's right,I forgot once again. Black Lives Matter only cares BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION,NOT OTHER BLACK LIVES. I'm sorry. My bad.My bad.
4. "MURDER? I'M BLACK,YOU RACIST!"
Again,as expected,you labeled proven facts of the FBI about blacks committing the most amount of murders as "racism agenda and stereotypes". The dropping out of high school and born out of wedlock are actually true,as I proved above with FACTS. It's very relevant as it shows how the BLM cares SO MUCH about the black lives lost in those cases,and how it is doing SO MUCH to help them. Also,according to the same WASHINGTON POST whose sources you posted,mass shootings account for a tiny amount of deaths in the USA.
How about riots? Be it Rodney King,Ferguson,Milwaukee,Chicago riots,every major riot in this country has been instigated by BLM,who believe violence is the answer when it should not even be a question.
5. "YOU'RE RACIST IF YOU CRITICIZE BLACKS,BUT YOU'RE EMPOWERING IF YOU CRITICIZE WHITES"
You just now admitted that there is hatred of white people among BLM. You literally wrote that in your 4th point. So,because some people used to keep slaves in the past,then that means that their sons and daughters should undergo the hate and revenge? Glad you cleared that up. Of course,it matters that America is not as racist as it was in the 1960s. It shows that the civil rights movement has reached so high to stop racism without the BLM's frantic efforts to revive it.
I already proved that blacks are dropping out of high school in higher rates than whites above with FACTS,which some BLM activists call "STEREOTYPE".
The idea that black people in the United States are disproportionately poor because America is racist; that’s just not true, at least not in terms of America’s racism today keeping black people down. It’s just not the case. If that were the case then you’d have to look at group income, and decide based on group income who’s been victimized the most, and who the country was built for. By that standard, the country was built by Asians, because the racial group with the highest median income in the United States is Asians. The Constitution was not written by a bunch of people who speak Korean. Because the Constitution is a document of freedom, not a document of ethnicity.
So here are the three rules. You want to be rich in America; you want to do well in America? Put aside the whining about the system.
According to the Brookings Institute, 2% of Americans who followed these rules are in poverty. 75% have joined the middle class. What about racism? 71% of poor families with children are unmarried. The poverty rate among non-married white families was 22% in 2008; that same year the poverty rate among black married couples was less than 7%.
But what happened to racism? Why weren’t those black married couples poorer than the single white moms? Because it doesn’t have to do with color; it has to do with life decisions.
Well,shouldn't the BLM be concerned about the single motherhood rate? Couldn't the BLM decide solutions about that? Couldn't BLM make black people aware of that?
Oh,that's right,I forgot once again. WHAT IN GOD'S NAME IS THE MATTER WITH ME? Black Lives Matter only cares BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION,NOT OTHER BLACK LIVES. I'm sorry. My bad.My bad.
6. "IT MUST BE THE WHITE SUPREMACY"
The whites freed the slaves,the whites brought
in the civil rights act,the whites voted in a black President. Where's the
"white supremacy" in all of this? You automatically assume someone to be privileged because he has a particular skin color. THAT is racist.
The fact that you can't get a job is not because they dropped out of high schools and didn't complete their education,it's because of the white supremacy. How convenient.
Also,I would like to point out that this is the intellectual capacity of the Left. If you ask them for proof of institutionalized racism,their answer would be,"FUCK TRUMP,RACISM EXISTS. I DON'T HAVE TO POST EVIDENCE."
Idiotic,but the best that could be expected from them.
7. "IT HAPPENED A CENTURY AGO! I CAN'T GET OVER IT!"
Slavery existed and the whites freed you. And the whites brought in the Civil Rights Act. Hah,it's so idiotic(but again,the best that can be expected),that you support the Democratic Party. Newsflash,The Democratic Party protected slavery and went to a war with the Republicans to keep slavery intact. Oh yes,did you know that the Democratic Party founded the KKK.
Stop your bogus arguments of slavery. You support the same party which supported slavery and the KKK.
Again,it's so funny how no black talks about the Black Panthers. As I said,if you kill blacks,you are racist,but if you kill whites,you are empowering. Save your racist speech for the next BLM meeting.
8. "BLACK LIVES MATTER MORE"
You shared a source with 8 or 9 examples. What does that prove? Is there a proper source with you? A source which shows all the examples instead of 8 or 9 incidents which you then herald as the gospel truth of "police brutality".
The second link also doesn't make sense. So,even if blacks are the minority,what does that prove? Which community is attacked in shootouts more by the police? Whites. 61% whites to 32% blacks. The issue of population has nothing to do with the amount of people killed more of a community. It shows,that regardless of population,blacks are not TARGETED as much as whites are TARGETED.
Also,the same link goes on to show that blacks commit most of the crimes-----be it robbery,theft,murder,blacks commit crimes more than whites,so police officers would obviously apprehend them. And the BLM would then shout "RACISM".
9. "THE TRUTH IS A STEREOTYPE"
Loose characters and morals are not stereotypes,but facts,as I proved above about fatherless blacks,single motherhood rates,and the high rate of school dropouts. Somehow,the BLM calls the truth a stereotype.
"The police are the trigger happy people, which can be easily proven. Classic case, John Crawford lll." Ah yes,one example is enough for the BLM. They only agree with things that support their point of view. Everything else contrary to their point of view is "racist". What a wonderful proof. "Classic case, John Crawford lll."
The real trigger happy people are the blacks who were responsible for the killings of 90% blacks,according to the FBI. Sorry,I have real facts,not "classic cases".
10. "IT'S TRUE! THE BLM SAID IT!"
Just now,I posted sources which showed that police targets whites as much as blacks. Mostly,blacks kill more blacks than the police. So,there is "black brutality",is there? There is no brutality of any kind. The BLM invents those words to corrupt your minds and make you hate whites.
As I proved above with FACTS and not CLASSIC CASES,the amount of whites born out of wedlock,or dropping out of high schools,or growing up without fathers is significantly lower than blacks.
Obviously,none of it is their fault,but what does the BLM do to help them? Goddamnit....Black
Lives Matter only cares BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION,NOT OTHER BLACK
LIVES. I'm sorry. My bad.My bad.
11. "REBUTTED......AT LEAST,I THINK I DID."
You did not rebut anything as much as spew rhetoric out of thin air. You posted no sources or facts,just "CLASSIC CASES".
The BLM doesn't care about black lives,only those BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION. They brainwash you and other blacks that the other problems are not problems,only BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION are problems,and for all of that,the white man is to blame. No facts. No evidence. Just the fault of the white man.
12. "THE BIGGEST CLASSIC CASE OF THE CENTURY-----------------------MARTIN LUTHER KING WAS A RACIST!"
I read your 13th point once. Then I read it again. And again. And again.
So judging people by the content of their character is racism? And since, Martin Luther King was the one who said that,he was a racist,was he?
Think clearly,my friend. I am really sorry to say that the BLM and the liberal media has brainwashed your mind. They have made you hate whites,ignore the truth and made you believe that EVERYTHING THAT GOES WRONG IN YOUR LIFE IS BECAUSE OF THE WHITE MAN. I assure you,this is not so. The BLM has an agenda. An agenda of making people hate whites which it will pursue till the end of time. Think for yourself,stop listening to their lies and stop hating someone because they are white.
Con
#6
Nobody denies it,even though black-on-black crime is significantly higher than white-on-white crime. We don't ignore it and blame it on "racism"
Yeah you don't blame racism because blacks are the ones who are oppressed and gets discriminated more than white people so of course whites aren't going to "blame it on racism"
The issue of white fathers leaving their parents is unaddressed because it happens the least out of Blacks,Hispanics and whites.
Can't be helped. Parental issues has nothing to do with BLM. I think your white privilege card declined.
People don't talk about whites on this issue,because of "white privilege". They don't because whites don't drop out of schools at the abysmal rate as blacks.
It is not talked about because of white privilege.
The dropping out of high school and born out of wedlock are actually true,as I proved above with FACTS.
Again, those have nothing to do with BLM. You just want to pull out your white privilege card.
It shows that the civil rights movement has reached so high to stop racism without the BLM's frantic efforts to revive it.
BLM isn't reviving it. Our purpose for BLM is for equality.
Well,shouldn't the BLM be concerned about the single motherhood rate? Couldn't the BLM decide solutions about that? Couldn't BLM make black people aware of that?
BLM is already aware of that. It can't be helped. You can't blame individual's actions and push it onto an entire activist group. Especially something trivial as a single mother. There are white single mothers too. You pulled out your white privilege card again. Debit or credit?
You automatically assume someone to be privileged because he has a particular skin color. THAT is racist.
It's not racist. It's the truth.
Prime example of white privilege.
Case one: A jury has sentenced a Waco (TX) man convicted of stealing a $35 rack of ribs to 50 years in prison. (Black man) 50 years in jail over some ribs. Source: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/willie-smith-ward-texas-man-gets-50-years-in-prison-for-stealing-rack-of-ribs/
Case two: A white man named Ethan Couch. He killed four people while driving under the influence of alcohol and drugs on June 15, 2013, In Burleson, Texas. Yet he received no prison time after a psychologist testified that Couch was a victim of "affluenza," a product of wealthy, privileged parents who never set limits for him. They just said he had mental illness, gave him a pat on the wrist and never even punished him. Source: https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/02/us/ethan-couch-affluenza-jail-release/index.html
Now compare that case, to the black man who stole some ribs. Prime example of white privilege, there's no way around that.
Now explain that.
Also,I would like to point out that this is the intellectual capacity of the Left. If you ask them for proof of institutionalized racism,their answer would be,"FUCK TRUMP,RACISM EXISTS. I DON'T HAVE TO POST EVIDENCE."
Even if proof is provided, you will still see the "left" as wrong and live in your cloud of delusion. What if tomorrow, Donald Trump walks into a room full of black people and calls them niggers, and it goes viral. I tell you about it and give you a link to it (actual proof) you would even then still call me a liar and you will still say Trump is not racist. Have fun continuing to suck Trump's dick.
Blacks are not TARGETED as much as whites are TARGETED.
Yes they are.
The BLM invents those words to corrupt your minds and make you hate whites.
Like I said there is no brainwashing, if I don't like someone then it's because of me, not someone else. This is reality.
The amount of whites born out of wedlock,or dropping out of high schools,or growing up without fathers is significantly lower than blacks.
And?
Your white privilege card swiped again.
The BLM doesn't care about black lives,only those BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION. They brainwash you and other blacks that the other problems are not problems,only BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION are problems,and for all of that,the white man is to blame. No facts. No evidence. Just the fault of the white man.
There are white cops that kill black people unjustly. That's evidence right there. I already stated different names of the black people previous rounds. You can also look it up for proof since you will call me a liar anyways.
And since, Martin Luther King was the one who said that,he was a racist,was he?
No, MLK was not a racist, but you are.
To reassure you, I have my own mind and my own reasonings, I do not hate all of white people I actually love white people (the ones that aren't racist). I do think for myself and I'm not getting persuaded from lies. The truth is the truth keep living in your delusion. I can't believe how you are acting, how dare you.
Round 4
Pro
#7
Ah....back to the rhetoric,are we? Let's see.....
BLM should change its name to black lives lost by cop action matters then. If you care about black people,then you have to care about all black people equally. You should help every black child who is growing up without a father. Shouting slogans like a hypocrite against cops means nothing.
I posted a study conducted by Harvard University and Urban Institute that showed nearly half of the black students drop out whereas only 7 to 8% of whites do so. Is that personal choice or white privilege? If it is white privilege,explain how. Oh,sorry,sorry,as you said in the comments,it's because the sky is blue. I get it. My bad.
Again,more than half of the black children are born out of wedlock. The BLM should change its name to black lives lost by cop action matters. If you don't care about those black children and don't try to help them,then you're a hypocrite when you say black lives matter.
BLM is obviously reviving racism when it promotes hatred of whites,as you wrote in your 4th argument of round 2. BLM wishes that racism never stops,so that their movement remains in power and that black youth die to fuel their power.
Shouldn't the BLM discourage single mothers? Shouldn't it create awareness about the issue if EVERY BLACK LIFE MATTERS TO THEM? The answer is they don't care about blacks. They just want blacks to keep dying so that they can exploit it for their political use. And as I said,the rate of single white mothers is 18.3%,which is nothing compared to the 55.1% of single black mothers. Is this white privilege too? How......Oh,I get it,I get it....the sky is blue.
Wow,man. Nice try. Good cherry-picking. Unfortunately,we are not fooled the same way as blacks are fooled by BLM.
A jury has sentenced a Waco man convicted of stealing a $35 rack of ribs to 50 years in prison.
But no, it wasn't the only crime he ever committed.
Forty-three-year-old Willie Smith Ward was convicted and sentenced on robbery charges Wednesday, May 29. The Waco Tribune-Herald reports that Ward also threatened a grocery store employee who tried to stop him from stealing the rack of pork ribs in 2011.
Forty-three-year-old Willie Smith Ward was convicted and sentenced on robbery charges Wednesday, May 29. The Waco Tribune-Herald reports that Ward also threatened a grocery store employee who tried to stop him from stealing the rack of pork ribs in 2011.
The employee testified that Ward told him he had a knife.
The jury recommended Ward be sentenced as a habitual criminal. Ward has previous felony convictions for burglary, attempted robbery, aggravated assault, leaving the scene of an accident and possession of cocaine, and four misdemeanor convictions, including two thefts.
The jury recommended Ward be sentenced as a habitual criminal. Ward has previous felony convictions for burglary, attempted robbery, aggravated assault, leaving the scene of an accident and possession of cocaine, and four misdemeanor convictions, including two thefts.
The jury sentenced him to 50 years taking all these previous felonies into account.
Nice try,seriously. Fooled me for a minute.
The case about the drunk driver,he was drunk and did it in a fit of aberration, However,this is the only felony he has committed apart from violating his parole. They don't hold the same gravity as a man who has previous felony convictions for burglary, attempted robbery, aggravated assault, leaving the scene of an accident and possession of cocaine, and four misdemeanor convictions, including two thefts. Not under the influence of alcohol.
Where's the white privilege here? Oh,I see,I see.....the sky is still blue.
Don't give me the "what if" scenarios and the hypothetical future. Has he done something like that as of now,and do you have proof of that? No,but "FUCK TRUMP,RACISM EXISTS. I DON'T HAVE TO POST EVIDENCE." Yeah....that makes sense.
Also,"have fun continuing to suck Trump's dick"
This is exactly what I meant by loose morals and loss of character.
It's not just that you don't like whites. You hate them as you said in your 4th argument of Round 2.
This link shows that black cops are as likely to kill blacks than whites. What will you say now? Blacks are racist against blacks? Post a source like this instead of saying that the sky is blue,therefore white cops are racist.
You love white people? You just said that you hate them? You haven't even met me,and you call me a racist.
No,no,bluster,oaths and curses won't work on me,mate. "I can't believe it,how dare you". Out of valid arguments,are you?
Con
#8
I'm 23 years old and I have my own shit going on what the hell I look like traveling across the world because people grew up with only one parent in the household? There are already camps for that (For example a while back Steve Harvey made a boys camp) it was for young men who didn't have their fathers in their lives and they went there for healing. I didn't grow up without a father and I'm just fine. No one came to my aid just because I didn't have a father, I honestly don't care. It's unfortunate that my father was not in my life, but it turns out I never needed him anyway. Mothers are more like mothers AND fathers. Especially mine.
If it's someone personal choice to drop out of school then hey, that's their business good for them. It's some people who drop out of college or don't even go to college who end up successful (like celebrities)
A lot of other races than just black are born out of wedlock. Stop villainizing black people to make yourself look good.
Promoting hatred of whites? When there was once slavery? Yeah okay
"They just want blacks to keep dying so that they can exploit it for their political use." How dare you say such a thing
"he was drunk and did it in a fit of aberration" - YOU JUST MADE AN EXCUSE FOR HIM, WHEN HE TOOK FOUR PEOPLE'S LIVES. How ironic lmfao. Classic case of white privilege. How could you. So he did it in a fit of aberration and that makes it okay? Alright.
"However,this is the only felony he has committed apart from violating his parole." - It doesn't matter, he killed four people. If this was a black man they would have threw him in jail and threw away the key. They wouldn't call it "mental illness". If this was a black guy, you wouldn't be making excuses for him.
Despite Willie Smith Ward supposed background, throughout it all, he never killed anyone. Ethan Couch did.
"Has he done something like that as of now,and do you have proof of that? " - Oh so you are openly admitting that he has done something like that. Even though I don't need proof, since it has happened, I'm still somehow a liar. I can't believe people like you support a man who admitted that he would have sex with his daughter because he finds her attractive. Oh wait, is that a lie too? Need proof? Alright then.
"This is exactly what I meant by loose morals and loss of character." - Oh shut up you are the one with loose morals and loss of character
I never once said I hate white people I said I like some.
By the way, the sky is blue. Source: https://spaceplace.nasa.gov/blue-sky/en/
Round 5
Pro
#9
No,you were obviously very angry because your father left you. You hated him and so,you projected that hate and anger on the white people,on advice from the BLM. Other black children need to be counseled and saved from the hate and rhetoric that the BLM provides them instead of helping them cope with the loss of their fathers.
Ah,yes. This is why the black community is not progressing forward. It's because BLM apologists like you actually encourage them "to drop out of schools and become successful like celebrities". And then when you can't get a job,it's not because of your lack of education but "racism". If you realized how ludicrous that sounds,you would never have said it.
Whites are the lowest race which has children being born out of wedlock. Blacks is the highest. It's not villainizing. It's called saying the truth.
Of course,you promote hatred. You literally said that there is hatred of whites among BLM in your previous argument. You support the Democratic Party which supported slavery and founded the KKK. Go fool someone else. How convenient that everyone talks about slavery,but how no BLM guy has the balls to talk about the Black Panthers.
Once again,BLM wants the blacks to keep dying so that they never run out of popularity. They want you to die,so that they can exploit your death.
Typical BLM logic. Putting words in people's mouths. I never said that it makes it alright. I stated a fact. Did he not do it when he was under the influence of alcohol? HAHAH....you BLM guys are so paranoid.
Again with the "what-if" scenarios. Nobody has time for that crap.
HAHAHA....."Supposed background". That means you claim the paper to be false. Well,the same paper reported about Ethan Couch,and since it's a false paper,the report about Ethan Couch is also false. You shot yourself in the foot.
Typical black logic.....Asking for proof is admission of guilt. Seems you guys are carrying forward the legacy of McCarthyism. If you don't have proof,then you have no basis to make that claim. And he said that he would date her if she was not his daughter. Wouldn't Bill Clinton date his daughter if she were not his daughter? Oh,that's right,he would just rape her,like he raped multiple other women in his life.
You are the one who's calling other stupid bitches and telling them to suck Trump's dick. You are the one with loose morals.
But you hate most. You said exactly that in your previous argument.
The sky is blue,and so whites are racist. That's your logic? That's stupid. Even the BLM wouldn't say that. It's too stupid.
Con
#10
I never took anything from BLM and I'm not being brainwashed, don't you dare paint me as the stereotypical person who resents their father. I have no good or bad feelings toward my father. I am indifferent. I don't hate my father. At the same time I don't want to have shit to do with him and that is my right to say that. I'm not angry over my father. What does anger prove? Anger won't make him be there for me. I have over 20 siblings who I don't even know. He doesn't take care of any of his children.
I never encouraged to drop out of school in fact I want everyone to have their education but sometimes school isn't for everyone and they make the decision it's up to the parents who instill those values into their child so they can keep pursuing their education and finish it. I knew of a woman who is well to do, with a good job and a huge nice house who never went to college.
"Whites are the lowest race which has children being born out of wedlock. Blacks is the highest."
Blacks don't smell like wet dog and they know how to season their food, that's the lowest. As for the whites who smell like wet dog, they are the highest. How about I flip that back on you.
"Once again,BLM wants the blacks to keep dying so that they never run out of popularity. They want you to die,so that they can exploit your death."
First of all false, the objective of BLM is to prevent more deaths, bring more awareness and bring about justice. "They want you to die"? Fuck you bitch don't you ever wish death on me how dare you
"Did he not do it when he was under the influence of alcohol?"
Still using alcohol as an excuse. I wonder if this was a black person would you still be making these excuses
I never said the paper is false, I said "supposed" for my case since I have not seen it, but hey you're a racist cunt so who knows you could have been lying about all of us charges.
"And he said that he would date her if she was not his daughter."
Still doesnt make it okay.
"Wouldn't Bill Clinton date his daughter if she were not his daughter? Oh,that's right,he would just rape her,like he raped multiple other women in his life."
Wow I'm so surprised you said such a thing about a white man. I thought you were going to make excuses for him just as you did for trump, as if "he said he would date her" is any better than "having sex with his daughter"
"You are the one who's calling other stupid bitches and telling them to suck Trump's dick. You are the one with loose morals."
Stop acting like you've never ever cussed in your life, bitch
Thanks for the debate
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
I have grouped Pros arguments
1.Black Lives Matter doesn’t address main black issues
I have grouped Cons arguments
1.BLM’s true purpose is as he explains:”it's a pro black movement. We aren't saying that black lives are more meaningful than everyone else's, we are saying black lives are just as meaningful as everyone else's. The BLM movement isn't about separation, segregation or disengagement. The BLM movement is about a positive resolution.”
Both sides made strong claims with facts and evidence. The deciding factor will be the rebuttals.
Case 1: Black issues in communities-King claims-”"dropping out of high school" and "growing up without a father" are stereotypes and simply irrelevant. Has nothing to do with BLM..”
Where Pro responds-”Black Lives Matter only cares BLACK LIVES LOST BY COP ACTION,NOT OTHER BLACK LIVES.” Pro is able to back it up with facts and sources like-”The issue of white fathers leaving their parents is unaddressed because it happens the least out of Blacks,Hispanics and whites. As of today,the rate of black fathers leaving their kids is 48.5%,those of Hispanics 26.3% and those of whites 18.3%. (US Census Bureau, “Living Arrangements of Children Under 18”: Tables –CH-2, CH-3, CH-4. 1960 – Present. U.S. Census Bureau July 1, 2012.)”and “The above link show studies conducted by Harvard University and Urban Institute which shows nearly half of the Latino and African American students who should have graduated from California high schools in 2002 failed to complete their education. Just 57% of African Americans and 60% of Latinos graduated in 2002, compared with 78% of whites and 84% of Asians. Now,this is just for only one state. One can only imagine about the rest of the country. People don't talk about whites on this issue,because of "white privilege". They don't because whites don't drop out of schools at the abysmal rate as blacks.”
Next round rebuttals were the same shit.Con responds-”Can't be helped. Parental issues has nothing to do with BLM. I think your white privilege card declined.”
Doesn’t address the facts nor backs up claims of white privilege. Another problem with Con is that he tries to paint Pro as using his “white privilege” but only uses on incident to back up his claim.
Pro responds:”I posted a study conducted by Harvard University and Urban Institute that showed nearly half of the black students drop out whereas only 7 to 8% of whites do so. Is that personal choice or white privilege? If it is white privilege,explain how. Oh,sorry,sorry,as you said in the comments,it's because the sky is blue. I get it. My bad.” Facts and Logic
Con also cherry-picked situations, such as the two cases and what-if situations.
Arguments-Pro
Sources-Tie
S&P-Tie
Conduct-Pro wins, Con used poor conduct
" Have fun continuing to suck Trump's dick. "
""you're a racist cunt"
" Stop acting like you've never ever cussed in your life, bitch"
"fuck you bitch"
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
Con said a number of things that had poor conduct. Arguments are tied because both sides made good points, I was leaning towards pro, but decided his points were not enough to give him the arugements, as both sides in this debate were sort of a mess.
"bitch"
"fuck you bitch"
"classic case of white supremacy"
"classic case of white privilege"----pro's not even white lmao
"The police are the trigger happy people"
"Have fun continuing to suck Trump's dick. "
"you're a racist cunt"---which doesn't even make sense since Pro is not even white lmao
"MLK is racist"
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
So, the resolution here seems pretty clear; pro needs to show that BLM is systemically dishonest, and promotes a narrative of white hating.
Pros ENTIRE case here, is to throw an unending list of statistics, then assert that as a result of these; that BLM is brainwashing people to hate whites.
Even if I buy every specific thing pro says, he presents no evidence BLM brainwashes people to hate whites. At the very best, pros case is that BLM protesting police brutality and systemic racism is misguided, which falls way short of the rhetorical bar he set for himself.
Con correctly points out that the majority of these statistics raised are irrelevant; I side with him, though I think he could have elaborated on why better than he did.
It seems illogical to object to the validity of BLM protesting one particular type of injustice simply because there are more substantial matters at stake - this is prima facia absurd: For example, if I was punched in the face, and lost my job: it would be valid for me to be angry about both: as just because I object in public about one doesn’t mean I am disinterested about the other. Without pro doing more here, I cannot accept these branches of arguments.
Even were I to lower the bar pro sets for himself, to be whether BLM is justified or not, in terms of whether the issues of police brutality exist or are justified.
Con throws out multiple examples of clearly outrageous police killings of unarmed black people. That there are multiple explained police murders; and pros stats also show black individuals are killed disproportionally to their population: this puts me firmly down on cons side on this one.
The remaining issue I have with pros case is touched upon by con.
Pros entire case is implying correlation is causation. He argues that there is a lack of male role models due to single parenthood, that blacks commit more murders.
Why?
I have two options.
First that there is some systemic racism that drove these trends which may or may not now be self fulfilling, which con hints at on a couple of occasions reviewing the historical trends after Jim Crow.
Second , that it’s all solely black peoples fault, that they’re more likely to be murders, criminals and delinquent fathers because they’re black. Pro doesn’t come right out and say this, he blames “black culture”. But the insinuation appears there throughout the whole debate. Not only is there a clear value judgement being made, but the implication being made appears to be as con states “villainizing black people.”
The default position here is CLEARLY not to pressupose that black people are now criminal solely down to themselves given some of the history and issues. On points out, so even in this case pro doesn’t meet his burden, and quite frankly, renders his entire case particularly odious.
In terms of cons case: the main aspect that won it was very much on his demonstration that unarmed blacks are killed frequently. For me, in combination with pros lack of overall warrant wins this. His points 7,8 and 9 were particularly well reasoned.
The remaining points surrounding issues that blacks have to deal with but whites are not are particularly reasonable, and lends themselves well to calls of systemic racism. Pro doesn’t appear to address any of them.
From this position, the debate rapidly degenerated, with tropes and insults from both sides.
In general, pro loses on overall resolution and warrant as covered above: there was much more focus on rhetoric and odious insinuation from statistics than there was a legitimate attempt to engage in the points. The information con added in relation to specific cases was enough to show the basic premises of BLM are valid, and the issues he raised does imply systemic Racism.
I feel con could very much have obliterated pros case from round 1, had taken a step back and dealt head on with the points raised: but given the above, he does enough to win the resolution.
Arguments to con.
Conduct: I’m tying this, as there was clearly instigation and insults being hurled from both sides.
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:
I would like to thank both opponents for this debate
POOR CONDUCT:
Con had the worst debate conduct I've ever seen on this website in a long time. Throughout the entire debate, Con insulted and had a condescending attitude with pro, CUE THE MONTAGE.
" You just want to pull out your white privilege card. "
" No, MLK was not a racist, but you are. "
" Again with the "what-if" scenarios. Nobody has time for that crap."
" Stop acting like you've never ever cussed in your life, bitch"
" Oh shut up you are the one with loose morals and loss of character "
And my personal FAVORITE!
" Have fun continuing to suck Trump's dick. "
This obnoxious behavior has cost Con their conduct point.
I ask for other voters to consider this as well when voting
Neither convinced me of their side as neither exactly had good sources nor analysis to back up their claims. And both had good spelling and grammar.
The Mods will definitely offer your feedback if asked about why they trashed your vote. It is super annoying to get zapped but be bolstered by the fact that everybody gets votes deleted, the more you do the more you get deleted. Even mods get their votes deleted sometimes. Many votes get super-scrutinized for imperfections merely in hope of some tactical improvement (which this debate's history demonstrates fairly ably). I'd encourage you to keep voting until your votes stick- the quality of debate oversight depends heavily on the quantity of voters and we clearly need a bunch more regular voters.
Plagiarism by Pro? Unfortunate. I doubt the mods will do anything about Pro's R1. In any case, I enjoyed the debate. R1 and R2 were my strongest but I declined the rest of the debate because I tend to get heated when it comes to this particular topic. Me and Pro made a truce and we are cordial. Congratulations to Pro for the win. And congrats oromagi for your easy win in the BLM debate with Franklin. I would vote for you but every vote I put in this website, no matter how in line it is with the criteria and COC, it gets deleted by the mods which is extremely annoying especially coming from the fact of me putting thought into my vote and making things fair just for it to be deleted, even it being a short vote. Example: https://www.debateart.com/debates/917 - if you or anyone can explain what I did wrong, let me know. I only been on this site a little over a month. But anyways, Franklin clearly was sweating under pressure that was hilarious, I even had a BLM debate with him on debate.org.
Certainly not. It only contained those parts of his speech which contained references to other sources,such as FBI statistics. You are on a revenge tour due to what happened to you.
We should note that PRO's R1 argument was plagiarized from a public speech by Milo Yiannopoulos. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksRB4faMU7o
No problem, welcome to the site. Feel free to PM me if you have any questions.
Thank you for explaining this. I'll try to get two debates in.
I am an assistant moderator for votes: so my influence extends to assessing reported votes only; trying to help explain how vote moderation works.
You are correct, that this isn’t obvious (this is an oversight on our part), given that, we’ll work to correct it ; given that it’s a small community, it’s aometimes easy for us to forget that not every new person knows everything.
Like I said earlier, this rule isn't written anywhere. Also, are you a moderator or something? (sorry I'm new to this site)
The rule is not a judgement on you, or an assessment that your account is fake. I was explaining the backgrounds ima of the rule and why it exists exists - to prevent fake accounts voting on debates by enforcing a minimum standard of participation.
The rule is enforced across the board when a votes are reported, and will at some point be enforced automatically by software. It’s much easier to assess an individuals participation: we just look at their profile, than it is to assess whether a fake account is truly fake
While we definitely know this will prevent real humans who will go on to contribute to the site from voting initially; the barrier is fairly low, and is easy to reach: so is reasonable limitation compared to providing the ability to weed out these fake accounts.
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: Bazza97125 // Mod Action: Removed
Points awarded: 6 points to pro for arguments, sources, s/g
RFD: Good debate
Reason for mod action: This voter meets none of the criteria set forth in the COC. In order to be eligible to vote, Accounts must have read the site's COC AND completed at least 2 non-troll debates without any forfeits OR posted 100 forum posts
The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
*******************************************************************
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: Our_Boat_is_Right // Mod Action: Not Removed
Reason for mod action: The vote was borderline. By default, borderline votes are ruled to be sufficient.
The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
*******************************************************************
What about my profile makes you think it's fake?
I hadn't heard this term, "tryhard" and when DrF used it the first time in R2 of our BLM debate https://www.debateart.com/debates/960, I honestly thought DrF was just exhorting me to try harder. It wasn't until repetition in R3 that I realized that this was an insult beyond my ken:
1. an underskilled or untalented participant attempting to compensate with sheer effort in order to succeed: We annihilated a whole team of tryhards in their first multiplayer match.
2. a person who participates in a game or other activity with too much enthusiasm, emotion, effort, or commitment: These tryhards need to take a moment, take a breath, and chill out.
3. someone creating a false image to appear more attractive or appealing; a phony; a poser: He’s just a tryhard who thought buying a convertible would help him pick up girls.
I'll plead guilty to all 3 senses of the word so pardon my spaz & thx for the new word & the debate.
Yeah,well if you paid as much attention in completing your debates as you do in reporting others' votes,you might have completed an argument about the gun control debate which you accepted.
A little background - we have had problems in the past of particular users creating fake accounts and placing otherwise valid votes on their own debates.
Given this, we restrict the possibility of this happening by placing more restrictive limits on how much one needs to contribute to be allowed to vote: this is to dissuade individuals from simply creating a new account with a proxy and voting on their own debate. This will eventually be implemented in code, but right now is enforced manually.
You would, for example, find it suspicious if multiple accounts voted on a debate against you, when the account made little effort to engage in the side other than to post the vote against you. This rule is to try and prevent that from happening and limit to voters to those who have a minimum level of engagement.
Now,he had a perfectly logical and acceptable vote covering all grounds. But,his vote was removed because he hadn't posted 100 forum comments. What does that matter in voting? Does someone become a better voter by posting 100 forum comments? His vote was entirely sufficient. I have seen so many other votes in other debates which are vote bombs or put up by people without any valid reasons,including people who haven't completed all the given criteria. The vote he gave was perfectly valid and yet it was removed. And the reason? Not posting 100 forum comments.
Everybody here is tryhards
shut up u tryhard ur trash
I am not interested in your opinion. I'll contact bsh1 and virt directly about it.
As far as I am aware, that relates to tied votes only.
“The first policy change is that voters must offer an explanation (which is related to the content of the debate) of why they chose to award >>no points<<”
Wrong. All votes need to justify why they are tying arguments points, following the change that happened due to my votes that Bsh1 made recently.
A voter only needs to explain arguments if they award conduct points based on a forfeited round (but less than half the rounds):
“In the case of awarding conduct points >>>>solely on the basis of forfeits<<<<, there is an exception to these steps: a debater may award conduct points solely for forfeited rounds, but only if one debater forfeited half or more of their rounds or if the voter also awards argument points (or explains their decision not to award argument points in a manner which meets the argument points voting standards).”
lol if it is tied, that literally just means they tied. Why would you explain why they tied? That's a waste of time.
https://www.debateart.com/debates/955/vote_links/2250
This and our-boat's current vote award conduct without explaining why they tied arguments.
Listen, I really don't want to start fight, but why would you enforce a rule before it's written? Also, when did you start enforcing this rule?
Hi there - I’m going to send you a DM after work. Those votes were cast prior to the rule being enforced. The site owner and I are working on coding the rule into the site.
Also, I just found our that your friend ScoutMaster25 has four votes but has never participated in a debate though he is currently participating in a troll debate.
Sorry, I'm new to this site. I checked the rules and I did not see the policy that said I needed to complete two non-troll debates anywhere so could you specify where that is? Also, I looked into your profile and noticed a number of things you support that I would like to debate you at some point on. Some of your ideals included legalization of prostitution, legalization of all drugs, and replacing capitalism with socialism in America. In fact, if you would like to debate on any of your ideals on your profile page please let me know. Maybe than I can get my right to vote.
Thank you for your time,
Michael Hastings
Pro provides many reasons BLM is not accurate in its' information and many reasons it does not actually focus on helping black people but they don't really stick to the original statement "Black Lives Matter brainwashes peoples' minds to make them hate whites." If this was the only issue with either side I would have to say Con had a more convincing argument. However, Con made a lot of statements that they did not back up with facts such as " White people don't have to worry about the texture of their hair, the color of their skin color or their cultural accessories as the reason why they didn't get a job.". Also, Con loses some credibility when they say, " White people don't have to worry about having a talk with their children about obeying police officers and following their every command or their life could be gone." Commands such as what? Drop your weapon? Back away from the children? It doesn't matter what race you are. If you're perceived as threatening bodily harm toward a police officer or anyone else and you are not following the officer's commands you will be either shot or subdued.
Sources:
Con:
. CNN (wildly known as having liberal bias)
. ABC (wildly known as having liberal bias)
. Wikipedia (notoriously inaccurate)
. NASA (used to back up statement "the sky is blue")
. USA Today (wildly known as having liberal bias)
. Washington Post (wildly known as having liberal bias)
.
Pro:
. You Gov
. TFC (The Filipeano Channel)
. FBI (Federal Biro of Investigation)
. Harvard
. Los Angeles Times (slight bias towards the left)
. Waco Tribune
Because of the reliability of Pro's sources vs Con's sources pro wins the point for sources.
I didn't see any issues with grammer so I tied it.
I have the same issue with Con's swearing and insults as stated in most of the other votes. Overall, while pro did use a few insults con used many more.
*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: Michael_Hastings // Mod Action: Removed
Points awarded: 6 points to pro for arguments, sources, and conduct.
RFD: See above
Reason for mod action: This account is ineligible to vote. In order to be eligible to vote, Accounts must have read the site's COC AND completed at least 2 non-troll debates without any forfeits OR posted 100 forum posts
The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
*******************************************************************
Good day to you,sir. Good day.
At this point I can only refer you back to the original vote, and my responses here.
I don’t think that focusing on the wrong thing proves they are brain washing people to hate white people even if I take that resolution broadly. It’s a non sequitor. The issues con raised indicates there is some legitimate grievance which renders your argument that they brainwash people because they focus on one legitimate grievance over more important issues (of which you mentioned several).
While the argument “they should be protesting xxx” or “its not the biggest problem” may be valid points - theyre not the resolution and proving one doesn’t prove the other.
I can really do more than I already have to explain why that’s the case, the example I gave in the vote, and below with charities are key examples that illustrate the logical error. If that still doesn’t make it clear why you didn’t show the resolution, I don’t think there’s much more I can say.
It's not a "seemingly" higher priority problem. It is the ONLY problem.
The logic is the same, for the same reasons. In both cases you can’t attribute malefeasance to the fact that one group doesn’t prioritize seemingly higher priority problems.
Animal charities and human starvation? You are comparing apples and oranges.
“Even if I buy” is voter speak - in this case it means that if I accept your arguments as true on its face - it doesn’t prove the resolution.
Specifically, the reason I said this was covered in my decision: if there are other more urgent or pressing issues faced by Blacks - this would show BLM is at best misguided, and focusing on the wrong issue: it doesn’t become an issue of “brain washing”, or teaching bias against whites unless you show malicious and deliberate intent.
It’s a bit like animal charities. A charity for taking in stray dogs and raising awareness of animal cruelty may not be the most pressing issue faced by humanity: but listing statistics about human starvation and the effects of war would not prove that the charity was brainwashing and biased against humans. The logic in these two cases are much the same.
Where did you get that idea that I was questioning his bias? The word bias or biased never even appeared in one of my comments. I just asked for explanation of the votes. Fine,I won't ask for that from now on.
While I very much appreciate the defence on a personal level: I think it’s important that everyone is free to ask questions and feel comfortable challenging decisions they feel are unfair - after all if I am not willing to defend decisions, I shouldnt be making them.
As a moderator I am expected and deserve an extra level of scrutiny; and I am happy to explain all my decisions in detail if necessary.
Even if you buy? What does that mean? Are you saying the statistics are flawed? I don't know.....those are of the FBI........is the FBI racist too?
How is black-on-black crime irrelevant when it is responsible for 90% of blacks being killed? The only reason it can be irrelevant is it does not fit the agenda of BLM,which is why it refuses to make people aware of those facts. Why would someone do that if he is genuinely concerned about black lives? Someone will only do that if he hates the other side,which are whites.
Where is the "white supremacy"? Where are the racist cops? I posted a source from the liberal Chicago Tribune which shows black cops kill blacks the same as white cops. And moreover,61% whites are klled to 32% blacks. Where's the white supremacy in any of this?
I could understand if BLM protested against both whites and other problems like black-on-black crime,single motherhood,high school dropouts,etc. But the problem is,they don't,even going so far as to say that "we won't protest against black-on-black crime,it's not a major issue."
What is that if not hatred of whites?
As I outlined in the decision the only thing wrong with Dr.Franklins vote is that he appears refers to another voters RfD in Leiu of justifying the conduct point he awarded. This is expressly prohibited by the CoC.
As a vote moderator, decisions are made not on the content or validity of the vote in question - but whether the voters adhere to a specific set of criteria spelled out in the CoC voting rules.
As a voter, I review the arguments made as they pertain to the resolution. In the case here I disagree with the validity of your logic as I think even if I accepted most of what you said as true - it wouldn’t prove the resolution, and so you didn’t uphold your side.
It sounds like your questioning potential bias in Ram. Just refrain from doing so.
I believe your objection is explained by the following part of my vote:
“Even if I buy every specific thing pro says, he presents no evidence BLM brainwashes people to hate whites. At the very best, pros case is that BLM protesting police brutality and systemic racism is misguided, which falls way short of the rhetorical bar he set for himself.
Con correctly points out that the majority of these statistics raised are irrelevant; I side with him, though I think he could have elaborated on why better than he did.
It seems illogical to object to the validity of BLM protesting one particular type of injustice simply because there are more substantial matters at stake - this is prima facia absurd: For example, if I was punched in the face, and lost my job: it would be valid for me to be angry about both: as just because I object in public about one doesn’t mean I am disinterested about the other. Without pro doing more here, I cannot accept these branches of arguments.”
The last paragraph is most specifically addressing your concern - with an example.
Let me say it again: I never said he is biased,and if anyone thinks that I said that,you are wrong. I only asked him on what basis he made his vote and on what basis he removed someone else's vote. Is questioning something equal to accusing someone of bias? Or am I not allowed to question certain things because I haven't posted 100 forum comments?
Ram is the probably the least bias on this site. He gives reasons of what you didn't do to comply with the rules. If you want an appeal, you can go to Virt, or the highest bsh1.
How is I wanting clarification " putting words in [your] mouth?"
Wait a minute,don't put words in my mouth. I never said something like that. I just questioned on what basis he made HIS votes and on what basis he removed Dr.Franklin's and Our Boat is Right's votes. Questioning something is not accusing someone of being biased.
Are you implying ramshutu is being " bias " and is purposely removing Dr. Franklins vote?
So,if next day,God forbid,you get cancer,and then you go to the hospital. There they tell you that it's nothing,just go home and take an aspirin. Would that work?
You ignored a lot of points that I made,when you cast your vote. If BLM doesn't protest the main problems and goes after something which has no impact on them,then obviously they are promoting a kind of hatred. Con actually said that BLM hates whites in one of his arguments.
You wrote in your vote that Con provided multiple examples of shootings by whites. Really? He provided 6 examples. I provided a source from the FBI,a whole year's worth of data that showed blacks are killed by more blacks,police kill more whites and blacks commit most of the crimes. You ignored this when voting. You are free to do that,of course,but it makes me wonder,why? The BLM ignores this and protests against white people. It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out this is hatred.
There is also a considerable difference between anti-malaria charities and BLM,because anti-malaria charities don't go out,throw stones and start riots like BLM does.
Also,if you had read the arguments,you would know that under the Jim Crow laws,the single motherhood rate in the black community was 22% compared to the 55% now. Doesn't this have an impact on them? The real problems in the black community is black-on-black crime,dropping out of schools and black fathers leaving their children and blacks committing most of the crime. But which issue does the BLM go after? "White supremacy".
If that's not hatred,I don't know what is.
The only thing I can conclude is that you ignored most of my points and voted on the basis of your beliefs.
You are of course,free to vote the way you want based on your beliefs,but removing someone's vote which says the contrary? What does that achieve?
What other insults do I have to use?
I can only vote on the arguments, and resolution.
BLM “brainwashing people into hating whites” is an extreme resolution.
If BLM is misguided and is protesting the wrong aspects - it does not automatically mean that they are brain washing people into hating whites. One can be true without the other - and this is the key issue that PRO missed in the debate - effectively arguing around the resolution.
In the same way, arguing that Anti Malaria charities should focus efforts on improving sanitation and access to water doesn’t mean those charities are inherently dishonest or “brainwashing”, and it’s thay distinction pro missed; and was required to affirm.