The Instigator
Pro (for)
The Contender
Con (against)

America is a Communist Country

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
TheMarketLibertarian has forfeited round #5.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2017 Category: Economics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 690 times Debate No: 100104
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (0)




The resolution is that the United States is a Communist Country: communist wil be defined as the propositions and theories espoused by Karl Marx.


I take it since my opponent didn't use round 1 for argument, nor should I. I accept the debate, and my stance is that America is not a communist country.

This is an interesting debate, and I await to see what my opponent will offer in terms of arguing for why America is communist.
Debate Round No. 1


As stated in Round 1, Communism for this debate will be defined as the propositions and theories espoused by Karl Marx, which means that I need to prove that the United States has adopted the propositions of Karl Marx, and that the theories of Karl Max are generally accepted as true. In chapter 2 of the Communist Manifesto, Karl Mark detailed his steps toward communism, ad the agendas of the Communist Party, those are:
1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes."

This is called the Property Tax which means that the Government owns all the property in America and that we are just renters. In addition to this, the Government can evict us at any time and use our land 'for public purposes,' and it's called Eminent Domain.

"2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax."


"3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance."

Estate Tax.

"4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels."


"5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly."

Federal Reserve- check

"6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state."


"7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan."

FDA- check

"8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture."

This one I'm not sure about.

"9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country."

Agenda 21- check

"10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc."




Now, I will be arguing using the Communist Manifesto, since this is a writing by Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. I'll cite each page I get it each quote from.

The steps that my opponent outline are from the Communist manifesto, but it is important to read what is said before it. It is clear these are not the only steps, and it is said in a few paragraphs before those steps on page 26 of the communist manifesto, "that the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of the ruling class to win the battle of democracy"[1] I will argue in the next point that America does not have the proletariat as the ruling class. There are other things which are necessary for a communist society as well, which I will discuss.

Communism requires a proletarian dictatorship which the United States does not have

In section 2 of the Communist Manifesto, page 22, it reads "the immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all other proletarian parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat"[1] and on page 25 it reads: “the working men have no country. WE cannot take from them what have not got. Since the proletariat must first of all acquire political supremacy, must rise to tbe the leading class of the nation…”

It is clear that the economic elite have power in the United States, and a study conducted by princeton confirms that special interests and economic elites have the most influence over government policy while the common people have no to little influence[2]

Thus, the United States does not meet this condition of the conquest of political power by the proletariat. Do I even need to go into how our government is directly run by millionaires and billionaires?(especially now with Donald Trump as president?) I hope not.

Communism requires the abolition of bourgeois private property which not all private property is abolished in the USA

From page 22 of the communist manifesto, it also reads "The distinguishing feature of communism is not the abolition of property generally, but the abolition of bourgeois property. But modern bourgeois private property is the final and most complete expression of the system producting and appropriating products that is based on class antagonisms, on the exploitation of the many by the few"[1]

While my opponent brought up how people pay property taxes, and thus land is owned by the government, they only do so with physical land property. This is not the most important type of property. For example, the laptop I am using right now is my personal private property. The items the business owner uses to have their workers work with is their own private property. For example, a warehouse that owns a forklift, the forklift is the business owner's private property. The only tax you have to pay on that is sales tax, but that's it. There is no continuous tax on items like that. Communism would abolish private property such as that as well, not just land property.

Additionally, while you could argue that people don’t own the land since we pay property taxes on land, I would still argue we do own it. If we didn’t, then why is it considered trespassing for someone other than yourself to go on the property without your permission? If it was the government’s property, then getting permission from the government would allow one to go on another person’s property, but you need permission from that person.

Communism requires the abolition of the family

On page 24 of the Communist manifesto, it reads, "Abolition [aufhebung" of the family! Even the most radical flare up at this infamous proposal of the communists."[1]

Considering there are plenty of people in the United States still with families, and society as a whole doesn't raise children, this is another reason we do not have communism.

Each of these three elemetns are vital to the establishment of a communist society, none of which the United States has.

The US has a mixed economy

Now, since the US does have the things which my opponent pointed out, but doesn’t have the above, it could be argued that the US has a mixed economy: a little bit of socialism/communism mixed with capitalism. I would therefore argue that in reality the US has a mixed economy



Debate Round No. 2


Proletarian Dictatorship- It is called democracy, and unfortunately, we are living under Jefferson’s nightmare- a tyrannous mob rule.

Private Property- Eminent Domain includes tools and machinery, which the government can steal from you.

The family- Yes, that to, it is called public education, where the State raises your children.



I'll respond to each of my opponent's arguments, with the same format:

Proletarian Dictatorship: As I pointed out with a study on the matter, in the United States, the average citizen has little to no influence over the government, while interest groups and economic elites have the highest influence. How is this a democracy? If anything, it is a plutocracy.

Private Property: regardless if the government can do this, all private property has to be used for public use now. Eminent domain allows the government to take private property and make it used for public property. However, it is still nonetheless private property until the government does this. There is still a significant amount of private property out there that the government is leaving untouched.

The Family: Parents are still the primary caregivers for their children. Sure, maybe for 6 hours out of the day a school is taking care of your children, but for 18 hours of the day, they are with their parents and family. Additionally, not everyone uses public education, some have their children go to private schools.
Debate Round No. 3


Last I checked 99.9% of the population are not billionares- therefore the ordinary idiot runs the country.

It's still state property=- they're charging rent right?

The family is already being abolished.


My previous points still stand since my opponent hasn't really challenged them in any way. Again, they're arguing against a scientific study in the matter of who controls this nation. To do that, they need scientific studies of their own at least. Why should we trust the word of a random person on the internet over the work of a scientific study?

I'll add for the property problem: taxation isn't exactly rent. The people get to vote on how much property tax they pay, or else they get to vote for the people who decide how much property tax is to be paid. When it comes to rent, you don't get to vote for your landlord or the rent they charge.

And finally, my opponent claims the family is abolished without even providing reasoning or evidence of such. To summarize a quote, "that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Capitalistslave 1 year ago
I have that happen now and then, I would suggest typing your argument into a google doc or something and then copying and pasting it here. That's what I do
Posted by TheMarketLibertarian 1 year ago
Sorry- I had an entire argument written up and it got deleted randomly, so I don't feel like typing it out again. In the morning.
Posted by PhilosophicalUmbreon 1 year ago
"Have you actually READ the book?" is not an argument.
Posted by GrimlyF 1 year ago
Have you actually READ the book? Your "check list" is a ludicrous list of vague similarities.
Posted by PhilosophicalUmbreon 1 year ago
I have heard this argument before.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.