"Celebrating Diversity" is a program of white genocide/Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-white.

Unfortunately, I have not had an opponent on the topic of race who has debated the topic as my opponent has. I would like to commend him for his efforts. I hope that the voters will give detailed reasons for their decisions so that my opponent and I may be more effective debaters in the future. Summary Pro's position: My opponent opened this debate with a mantra which mourns the alleged "genocide" of the White race. This mantra was more poetic than argumentative; thus appealing to emotion rather than intellect. Throughout the rest of the debate, my opponent has defended his use of the word "genocide" to describe the condition of the White race as a result of "celebrating diversity. " I would like to summarize his allegations that White people are experiencing "genocide" according to "who, what, when, where and why" he says "genocide" is being committed against the White race: Who? My opponent's position is that governments in "White countries" (according to him, countries that have predominantly White populations) are committing the genocide. I would like to remind the reader that these governments are also predominantly White and are elected by a predominantly White population. This allegation is tantamount to a conspiracy theory. My opponent has not proven a conspiracy to destroy the White race by governments of "White countries," he has only presented conjecture. What? My opponent's position is that genocide is being committed against White people through the 1. Violent crimes of non-Whites. I pointed out that this did not fit the definition of "genocide," to which my opponent insisted otherwise. 2. Demonizing of White achievement (colonization and industrialization). My opponent then said that current history books point out that colonization had negative impacts on non-Whites and that industrialization had a negative on the environment. He did not refute these claims by history books, he merely complained that those claims were there. Since he did not prove those claims were false, then he has no argument. His claim is that this "demonization of Whites" has "inflict[ed]. .. serious mental harm on members of the [White] racial group. He did not give any evidence for this claim. If this were true, should there not be records from mental health facilities to substantiate this claim? 3. Preventing White births through giving Whites the option to intermarry. This is ridiculous at best. Any reasonable person would conclude that giving someone more options for marriage does not constitute genocide! I'm sure the survivors of the Holocaust would have preferred this form of "genocide. " Interracial marriage is not required of any White person! 4. Immigration. Immigration only enhances the cultural experiences of Whites; it does not eliminate or "replace" White people as my opponent claims. I pointed out in the fourth round that in order to replace Whites, a White person would have to be deported or killed every time a non-White person immigrates to a "White country. " That is certainly not what is happening. When? My opponent has not told us when the alleged genocide of White people occurred or if it is occurring now when it started. That, of course, is because it did not/is not happen(ing). Where? My opponent claims the alleged genocide is happening in "White countries. " I have pointed out that these "White countries" have populations and governments that are predominantly White. If White people are destroying White people, then it could not be classified as genocide, it would rather be suicide. Why? My opponent did not give a motivation for the "genocide" he claims has/is happen(ed)(ing). Con's Position: My opening argument was to give the official definition of "genocide" from the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide which was: Article II: In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:(a) Killing members of the group;(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group. I then pointed out that White people have not suffered any of the above atrocities "with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, [the White]. .. rac[e]. " I have repeatedly pointed out that real genocide like that of the Holocaust and Rwanda were very different from my opponent's alleged "genocide" of White people. Let's look at those events and answer "who, what, when, where and why? " Who? Holocaust (H): Hitler and the Nazi Regime Rwanda: (H) Members of the Hutu tribe. What? H: Ghettos, gas chambers and concentration camps R: Mass killing When? H: During World War II R: April-July of 1994 (1984 in Round 4 was a typo) Where? H: In Germany and German occupied territories R: In Rwanda Why? H: Hitler had a bad experience with Jewish people as a child and hated them. (More reasons could be listed, I'm sure. ) R: A history of tension between Hutus and Tutsis Genocide during the Holocaust and in Rwanda are historically documented, unlike the alleged "White genocide. " I will repeat to my opponent, You don't know what genocide is! Conclusion My opponent stated that "'Celebrating diversity' is a program of White genocide. " He has not proven his resolution with documentation or with logic. This debate has a clear winner! Acknowledgments Thank you Charlester, for this debate and for your diligence in pursuing your resolution. I hope that you will continue to debate on ddo and that you and I will have the privilege of debating again. You have been a great opponent. If the voting results of this, your first debate on ddo do not meet your satisfaction, I hope that you will not be discouraged and that you will learn from any mistakes you have made and try again. Thank you readers and voters for following this debate through all five rounds.