From Staff Reports 

The resolution “Asheville has disenfranchised its African-American population” was discussed during a 90-minute debate Nov. 13 in the auditorium at Asheville High School.

After the debate, the judges voted 5-0 in favor of the “pro” speakers. The auditorium, with a capacity of 1,800 to 2,000 seats, appeared to be mostly full.

The pro resolution speakers included Dr. Dwight Mullen, a political science professor at UNC Asheville, and Dr. Darin Waters, a history professor at UNCA.

The con speakers included Dr. Carl Mumpower, a practicing psychologist in Asheville; and Isaac Herrin, a Bryson City native and chair of the Western Carolina University College Republicans for 2015.

Serving as moderator was John Boyle, a reporter for the Asheville Citizen-Times since 1995, who serves as “Answer Man” for the newspaper.

The event was the first in a series of the Asheville High/SILSA Speech and Debate Series honoring the legacy of Wilma Dykeman. Dykeman (1920-2006) was billed in an event brochure as “the mountain South’s great humanist of the 20th century.”

Welcoming the crowd was Pam Baldwin, superintendent of Asheville City Schools, who said, “I’m very excited to be here. I’m excited to see the turnout and to welcome everyone to the debate.”

She also said, “I believe that teaching by doing and learning by doing is the best way.” Baldwin thanked everyone for attending the debate.

Mullen started by noting that Asheville is acting as an agent of the state, citing voter suppression laws, reduced numbers of vote sites and reduced times for voting. He also said that “once” one could could register much more easily than now.

Both Mullen and Waters also spoke of the criminal justice system and business ownership, making the case that blacks had been less enfranchised in these areas as well. They contended it is a question of sharing power, with one person having one vote, but asked what explanation can one use for registration being unequal.

It is not just enjoying the right to vote, but enjoying the full measure of one’s citizenship, they contended.

In response, Mumpower said there has been a rejection of the true message of slain civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. and a rejection of the faith that has anchored the African-American population through the years.

In a reference to the power to vote, Mumpower argued that he disagreed that blacks have been disenfrachised. “We just had a black mayor (Terry Bellamy) and we also just elected an inexperienced black man (Keith Young) for City Council.”

Mullen and Waters said that Americans must take into consideration the history of the Jim Crow laws, as well as the history of racism. They wondered how one could say that blacks have not been disenfranchised.

Mumpower replied that there has been no more history of disenfranchisement for the blacks than that experienced by many other peoples down through history, referring to Native Americans, the Jews and other minorities.

He added “‘til the 1960s, we made progress” in civil rights. “Then came the war on poverty. Since then, black Americans have struggled to keep moving forward.”

Mumpower also said that “we’ve lost our moral compass.” As an example, he cited the 10 Commandments being taken out of the schools. “And until we return to those ideas of the great document, the Bible, we’ll continue to experience entitlement and selfish concerns governing society. We would be served best by going back to Solomon’s wisdom for our guide.”

What’s more, Mumpower said that, if one looked back before the 1960s, when African-Americans were “very heavily” involved in the church, they were continuing to move upward in society.

Meanwhile, Herrin indicated that the speakers on the other side of the debate are so stuck in a vacuum of political correctness that they do not realize it themselves. 

Mullen and Waters wondered  how the church could save blacks from the inequalities and how that is going to change government.

The pro side stated that its opponents talk about respnsibility, but there is not much talk about opportunity.

The pro side added that, in the end, it is like the Good Samaritan, finding someone on the road, down and beaten, “and saying, ‘What was your responsibility in this?’”