The Instigator
kasmic
Pro (for)
Winning
14 Points
The Contender
lannan13
Con (against)
Losing
7 Points

Christianity is akin to Fascism

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
kasmic
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 9/10/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,357 times Debate No: 79603
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (42)
Votes (3)

 

kasmic

Pro

Christianity is akin to Fascism

Definition of terms:

1. Christianity: "the religion that is based on the teachings of Jesus Christ"(1)

2. Akin: "similar or related"(2)

3. Fascism: "a way of organizing a society in which a government ruled by a dictator controls the lives of the people and in which people are not allowed to disagree with the government"(3)

4 Rounds/8,000 characters/72hr/Select Winner

Round 1 acceptance
Round(s)2-3 Arguments and Rebuttals
Round 4 Rebuttals and closing statements (no new arguments.)

This debate should be impossible to accept, please comment if interested.

Please no forfeits.

Sources:

(1) http://www.merriam-webster.com...
(2) http://www.merriam-webster.com...

(3) http://www.merriam-webster.com...
lannan13

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
kasmic

Pro

Christianity is akin to Fascism

Thank you Lannan13 for accepting the debate and good luck!

Akin having been defined as "similar or related.” I will be presenting how they are incredibly similar.

Fascism summary: The following is taken from howstuffworks(1)

Principles of Fascism

1:“Absolute power of the State: The Fascist state is a glorious, living entity that is more important than any individual. All individuals are part of the State, but the State is greater than the sum of its parts. All individuals must set aside their own needs and supplicate themselves to the needs of the State. There is no law or other power that can limit the authority of the State.

2: Strict social order: Social classes are strictly maintained in order to avoid "mob rule" or any hint of chaos. Chaos is a threat to the State. The State's absolute power and greatness depends on the maintenance of a class system in which every individual has a specific place, and that place cannot be altered.

3: Authoritarian leadership: To maintain the power and greatness of the State requires a single, charismatic leader with absolute authority. This all-powerful, heroic leader maintains the unity and unquestioning submission required by the Fascist state. The authoritarian leader is often viewed as a symbol of the State.”

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How Christianity compares to the fascist summary:

1: Absolute Power of the State/The Kingdom of God

Psalm 145:11 “They shall speak of the glory of thy kingdom, and talk of thy power;”

Within Christianity, people believe in pursuing the will of the Lord over their own will. The kingdom of God is greater than the individual. There is no “law or other power that can limit the authority of the” kingdom of God.

2: Strict social order: One need hardly look further than the ten commandments to see that Christianity is based on an idea of “strict social order.” There are several verses of scripture that dictate appropriate/inappropriate behavior.

3: Authoritarian Leadership: God is perceived as above reproach and is a leader with absolute authority. He is all-powerful, heroic and requires submission. God is the symbol of Christianity.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Below I will present ideas and statements from fascism and Christianity side by side for comparison. I will mostly be using “THE DOCTRINE OF FASCISM” by Benito Mussolini and the Bible (KJV) as sources.

A = Fascism doctrine
B = Christian doctrine

Christianity and Fascism have similar doctrine. Below are examples of this.

1: Both claim to be spiritual ideas that can only be spiritually discerned.

A: “ Thus many of the practical expressions of Fascism such as party organization, system of education, and discipline can only be understood when considered in relation to its general attitude toward life. A spiritual attitude.”(2)

B: 1 Corinthians 2:14 “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

2: Both acknowledge a higher law(God’s law) and strive to promote the society(kingdom of heaven) over the individual.

A: “ The Fascist conception of life is a religious one, in which man is viewed in his immanent relation to a higher law, endowed with an objective will transcending the in­dividual and raising him to conscious membership of a spiritual society.” (2)

“ Anti-individualistic, the Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State,”(2)

“The Fascist loves his neighbor”(2)

B: Isaiah 55:8 and Mathew6: 25,33 Mathew 10:37-39 Mark 12:31

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.”

25 “Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?”

33 “But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.”

“He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me. He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life for my sake shall find it.”

“Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.”

3: Both think that personal wealth can be a problem.

A: “It (Fascism) does not believe in the possibility of "happiness" on earth as conceived by the economistic literature”(2)

B: 1 Timothy 6:10 Mathew 6: 19-21 Mathew 19:24

“ For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.”

“Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”

“And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.”

4: Both sources of education, spiritual life and enforced thru discipline and authority.

A: “ Fascism, in short, is not only a law-giver and a founder of institutions, but an educator and a promoter of spiritual life. It aims at refashioning not only the forms of life but their content - man, his character, and his faith. To achieve this propose it enforces discipline and uses authority, entering into the soul and ruling with undisputed sway. Therefore it has chosen as its emblem the Lictor’s rods, the symbol of unity, strength, and justice.”(2)

B: Just changing Fascism to Christianity in the above quote resonates with Christian values…

“Christianity in short, is not only a law-giver and a founder of institutions, but an educator and a promoter of spiritual life. It aims at refashioning not only the forms of life but their content - man, his character, and his faith. To achieve this propose it enforces discipline and uses authority, entering into the soul and ruling with undisputed sway.”

I admit it is shocking how well that synergizes.

5: Both apply similar types of authority

A: Totalitarian: “of or relating to centralized control by an autocratic leader or hierarchy”(3)

B: Belief of God being omniscient, omnipotent, and omnipresent. Or in other words an autocratic leader.

Summary:

Due to the similarities of Christianity and Fascism in regard to their axioms and structure; it is reasonable to conclude that Christianity is akin to Fascism.

Sources:

(1)
http://people.howstuffworks.com...
(2)
http://www.worldfuturefund.org...
(3) http://www.merriam-webster.com...

lannan13

Con

I thank my opponent for the challenge, but now I plan to bring my own arguments claiming that Christianity isn't Fascist, but Totalitarian Communist.

Totalitarian Communism
1. a theory or system of social organization based on the holding of allproperty in common, actual ownership being ascribed to thecommunity as a whole or to the state.

2. a system of social organization in which alleconomic and social activity is controlled by a totalitarian statedominated by a single and self-perpetuating political party. [1]

3. of or relating to a centralized government that does not tolerate partiesof differing opinion and that exercises dictatorial control over manyaspects of life. [2]

This is the collective definition of the term of which I shall be using throughout the debate.
Redistrabution

Before I get into the early church calling for this I shall first get into the Biblical verses on the matter.

"For I do not mean that others should be eased and you burdened; but by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may supply their lack, that their abundance also may supply your lack - that there may be equality. As it is written, “He who gathered much had nothing left over, and he who gathered little had no lack.” (2 Corinthians 8:13-15)

Doesn't this almost seem a little familiar? We can see that this Biblical verse almost mimics Karl Marx's "From each accodring to his own, to each according to his need" argument. Shown in this Biblical verse it shows outright that people should produce what they can and the surplus is redistrabuted to the poor and those without. Before we jump off the deap end thinking the wrong way we can actually see that this is something that is ideal in that time period. Judeiah was a poor area in the Roman Empire, kinda like Western Kansas, so the fact that this redistrabution would help the people of Judeiah as wealth would pour in from Rome and Alexandria. This generally would eliminate the class and caste systems causing for case of equality. [3]

"Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul; neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common. And with great power the apostles gave witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And great grace was upon them all. Nor was there anyone among them who lacked; for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold
them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles’ feet; and they distributed to each as anyone had need." (Acts 4:32-35)

Here again, we see that after the death of Christ we see more distrabution of wealth in order to help the poor. Many people again are giving up their Earthly pocessions for the betterment of others. It is not like they are giving up a dollar or two, but this is their homes. We can see that the true Christians who "walked the walk" were communist.

Anti-Property

The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me." Lev 25:23

Here we can see God owns the property, and since he would be concidered the government which I'll get into later, the government would thus own all property which is, once again, another property of communism. [4] Vladimir Leinin, a Marxist advocate, argued on this theory, modernizing Communism for Russia and making it relivant as he applied it to land. This verse from Levetiucs outright argees with Lenin.

"And Jesus said to him, “Foxes have holes and birds of the air have nests, but the Son of Man has nowhere to lay His head." (Luke 9:58)

Here Jesus himself argues stating that Man has nowhere. One could easily state that man would have a house or some sort of shealter, but here Jesus is referring to property. Showing that the man should give up what he has in order for other to gain. This is revealed as the Fox OWN the holes they live in as the birds have nests, but Man wounders and has nothing as God has called them to go and preach the word and care for the poor. By doing this they abolish the property.

To further this I would like to go a little bit after the Bible to 397 AD. The Bishop of Constinople John Chrysostom argued against the owner ship of property and greed. He shown that people should give up what they have and go on to live real Christian lives. He stated, "You receive more than you give, you are benefied more than you benefit. You lend to God not people." [5] Here again we can see Christianity's disaproval of both property and wealth in the Bible and Church Leaders.

Christianity as a Totalitarian state.

Now that I have shown that the apects of Communist Christianity is true I shall now move on to Totalitarian side. I do this seperately since there are two completely separate types of Communism. See political compass system bellow. I'm escentailly arguing Upper Left while my opponent is arguing Upper Right.



"The eyes of the LORD are everywhere, keeping watch on the wicked and the good." Proverbs 15:3

Here's a scary Biblical verse that shows God just as Orwell describes Big Brother. Always watching. Though God might not be using Telescrenes, but he is everywhere all the time. Watching us like a hawk. Just like the Communist system in the USSR where the KGB constantly watched people and everyone was paranoid, because they didn't know if their neighbor was part of the KGB spying on them and if they did something bad the person had to report it or the said person might also be a KGB agent seeing if they were law abiding citizens. Just how God sent angels to test many in the Bible.

"
Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God."- Exodus 34:14

Here we can see that God demands ultamate loyalty. You cannot worship any other God, but Yahwey. Just as Stalin, Mao, Kim Jung Sung, or Pol Pot all demanded of their people. What happens when you cross their path?

"in flaming fire, inflicting vengeance on those who do not know God and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus." 2 Thes. 1:8

Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19 NLT)

Unfortunately I'm running out of characters here, but here we can see that if you question God that you will burn in hell or if someone questions God then the entire town pays for it. Just how if someone questions the government in North Korea their entire immidaiate family is taken to a concentration camp. Where they are worked to death just how things were in Gulags in the USSR.
Sources
1. (http://dictionary.reference.com...)
2. (http://dictionary.reference.com...)
3. (http://www.forbes.com...)
4. (https://www.reddit.com...)
5. (Bass, Diana Butler. "Ethics: Love Thy Neighbor." A People's History of Christianity: The Other Side of the Story. New York: HarperOne, 2009. 65-70. Print.)
Debate Round No. 2
kasmic

Pro

Con has made two basic claims. He says “I plan to bring my own arguments claiming that”

1: “Christianity isn't Fascist”
2: “but Totalitarian Communist.”

Observation:

Even if con manages to confirm the above, it does not negate the resolution. I am not arguing that Christianity is fascist, rather that they are “akin.” As Akin is defined as similar it is reasonable to say that Christianity can be akin to both Fascism and Totalitarian Communism. This is further supported by Con’s map of political orientation. He says “I'm essentially arguing Upper Left while my opponent is arguing Upper Right.” As you can see Totalitarian Communism and Fascism are akin as they are both on the upper portion of the graph. They are not entirely the same, but are clearly and indisputably “akin.”

Totalitarian Communism(TC) and Fascism are Akin:

If you recall in my opening round I listed 3 Core tenets of Fascism.

1: Absolute power of the State:

2: Strict social order:

3: Authoritarian leadership:

You will notice that none of this is in conflict with what con presented as the core tenants of TC. Thus if these points are Congruent with both TC and Fascism it is reasonable to conclude that they are akin to one another.

Overview:

It was once stated that things which are equal to the same thing are equal to each other. Again it is worth noting that I am not arguing TC, Fascism, and Christianity are equal. However, if Fascism at TC are both akin to Christianity they are also akin to each other. I have demonstrated this to be the case. Even if Con’s whole argument is accepted the resolution stands. Furthermore, to negate con must show that Christianity is not akin to Fascism, he has not done this. It matters not if Christianity is Akin to several other things including TC, it does not negate Christianity being akin to Fascism. Due to the similarities of Christianity and Fascism in regard to their axioms and structure; it is reasonable to conclude that Christianity is akin to Fascism.

lannan13

Con

I thank my opponent for such a speedy response. This round I shall be proving that Totalitarian Communism is NOT akin to Fascism and then show how Facism is not akin to Christianity.

Totalitarian Communism vs. Fascism



If we view the lovely picture above we can view a ton of the key differences between Communism and Facism. We can see that Communism is a classless soceity while Fascism has a multitude of classes. In Communism there is 1 Supreme Leader, while in Fascism there is only dedication to the country. The goal in fascism is the spread of Nationalism compared to the spread fo the communism. Here we can already see that these things are not akin, but as my opponent has stated, if these things are both related to Christianity then they are also related to each other. My next argument will be on the bases of comparing these two things.

"Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul; neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common. And with great power the apostles gave witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And great grace was upon them all. Nor was there anyone among them who lacked; for all who were possessors of lands or houses soldthem, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles’ feet; and they distributed to each as anyone had need." (Acts 4:32-35)

The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is mine. For you are strangers and sojourners with me." Lev 25:23


One of the key things in Communism vs. Fascism was that of Communism having the abolition of property and redistrabution to form a classesless society. We can see here in this verse that Jesus called for work as hard as they could, but they would be paid according to their need, again an aspect of communism, and this in itself reveals that this redistrubution would create a classless soceity. Many can see that in every communist nation and welfare state around the world that this is what occurs. The problem with this type of government is that it eventually runs out of other people's money and they live in collective poverty. Chrsosdom condemned the issue of wealth and greed that it lead to Christians being unable to run banks due to usuery being sinful. [1] This lead to the Jewish population taking that role and lead to a slippery slope of stereotypes.

Now let's move on to property. What do the Fascists say when it comes to property?

The state should retain supervision and each property owner should consider himself appointed by the state. It is his duty not to use his property against the interests of others among his own people. This is the crucial matter. The Third Reich will always retain its right to control the owners of property. (Barkai 1990, pp. 26–27)- Adolf Hitler [2]

"Under fascism, citizens retain the responsibilities of owning property, without freedom to act and without any of the advantages of ownership."- Ayn Rand, The Fascist Fronteir page 98.

Here we can see that under Fascism the people are permitted to continue to own property. Hitler shows that the only difference with Ayn Rand is that they can use Eminent Domain and seized the propert for public projects, but STILL people are permitted and entitled to own Private Property. This already highlights the second major difference now which is also supported by the Bible, because if we observe the Leviticus verse we can see that there is to be no Private Property.

Sources
1. (http://www.csmonitor.com...)
2. Barkai, Avraham. Nazi Economics: Ideology, Theory, and Policy. Trans. Ruth Hadass-Vashitz. Oxford: Berg Publishers Ltd., 1990.
Debate Round No. 3
kasmic

Pro

Con made two claims last round. I will negate both

Claim 1: Con claims to “prove(ing) that Totalitarian Communism is NOT akin to Fascism.”

All Con offers to support this is a few unwarranted claims. None of which demonstrates Communism and Fascism not akin. Again it is important to remember that akin means similar, not exact. I will refer voters to my last round under the section “
Totalitarian Communism(TC) and Fascism are Akin:” and restate that “You will notice that none of this is in conflict with what con presented as the core tenants of TC. Thus if these points are Congruent with both TC and Fascism it is reasonable to conclude that they are akin to one another. Con has not refuted those claims, and thus it stands that TC and Fascism are akin.

Claim 2: Fascism is not akin to Christianity.”

Con’s main support for this claim is concerning property. I appreciate greatly the quotes provided by Con on the subject at hand.

“The Third Reich will always retain its right to control the owners of property. “(Barkai 1990, pp. 26–27)- Adolf Hitler [2]

Essentially, in a Fascist society people are stewards over property but the state in reality owns all.


Now let’s compare to Christianity. The earth and everything in it belongs to God. Consider Gen. 14:199 22; Exod. 19:5; Lev. 25:23; Deut. 10:14; Psa. 24:1; Psa. 50:10-12; Psa. 89:11; 1 Cor. 10:26, 28.

In spite of this belief, the God of Christianity does allow stewardship. This is evident by commandments to not steal or covet. Clearly there is a level of ownership/stewardship in Christianity though at the core all things belong to God and he can do as he sees fit. This is synonymous to Fascism. People own property in a fascist society, though the state retains the right to control the owners of the property.

Thus we see that Con’s only contention that Christianity and Fascism are not akin is false. Even if it had been true, the sheer weight of all the other similarities that I listed would outweigh the one difference he listed and still demonstrate the two akin.

Overview:

Due to the similarities of Christianity and Fascism in regard to their axioms and structure (all left untouched by con and numerous); it is reasonable to conclude that Christianity is akin to Fascism.

This is a clear win for pro. Thanks for reading and voting.


lannan13

Con

My opponent claims that I provided nothing to show differences between the two, but let's reshow this.

Communism
-Promotes Classless Society
-One Supreme Leader
-Goal: Spread Communism World Wide.

Fascism
-Allows for different classes to emerge.
-Devotion to Country
-Wills of the Country over the people.

Not to mention that they are at different ends of the spectrum.



Now let's apply Christianity to these.

Communism
-Promotes Classless Soceity
-One Supreme Leader (God)
-Goal: Spread [Christiantiy] world wide.

Fascism
-Allows different classes to emerge.
-Devotion to Christiantiy.
-Wills of Christianity over people.

Now if we look at a key difference is that of the classes. I shall reveal a few verses again that show what the Bible has to say on that.

"For I do not mean that others should be eased and you burdened; but by an equality, that now at this time your abundance may supply their lack, that their abundance also may supply your lack - that there may be equality. As it is written, “He who gathered much had nothing left over, and he who gathered little had no lack.” (2 Corinthians 8:13-15)

"Now the multitude of those who believed were of one heart and one soul; neither did anyone say that any of the things he possessed was his own, but they had all things in common. And with great power the apostles gave witness to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. And great grace was upon them all. Nor was there anyone among them who lacked; for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles’ feet; and they distributed to each as anyone had need." (Acts 4:32-35)

Here in Corinthians we can instantly see communism as it is practically showing Karl Marx's Socialist Distribution Principle. This eventually trickles down to a classless soceity of which I've shown ealier in this debate and my opponent has dropped. Here Christ is calling people to give up their homes and pocessions of to give to the poor. Again showing the redistrabution leading to a classless soceity. My opponent has also dropped my argument of John Chrysodom who called for the abolition of property.

My opponent brings up that Hitler still stated that the property could be owned by the people, but still owned to the state, but he fails to acknowledge that Christianity abolishes property as I have previviously shown. (Lev 25:23, Acts 4:23-32, Palsms: 50:7, Kings 21:3) Eminent Domain, the government's taking of your property is entirely different than the communist system where there is no private property. In Fascism there is.

In conclusion, we can see that I have shown that Christianity is not like Fascism at all and is more like Totalirarian Communism if anything at all. I have provided both Biblical and historical documentation to support my evidence while my opponent is attempting to compare two objects on the surface, but when you dig deeper you see that they are not alike at all. I have shown that Christianity even shares many Marxist ideals with Communism.

With that I thank you and urge you to vote Con!
Debate Round No. 4
42 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Quite fun I have to say.
Posted by kasmic 1 year ago
kasmic
Thanks for debating me Lannan. It was a good round.
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Eyup.
Posted by kasmic 1 year ago
kasmic
We need more votes....
Posted by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
Look at the comments Lexus. I C&P'd the wrong source.
Posted by Lexus 1 year ago
Lexus
Lannan you should know better than to quote reddit :(
Posted by Tough 1 year ago
Tough
I do not have voting privileges yet and will vote when this RFD gets me them back.
Posted by Tough 1 year ago
Tough
RFD Part 1 'Pro's Case'
Pro's case rested on three principal ideas;

1) Christianity involves absolute power (god) similar to fascism's all-powerful government,
2) Strict Social Order (especially through classes) is a core tenet of fascism and the 10 commandments are strict unbreakable social laws of similar status of being unquestionable.
3) The leader (god/government) is absolute in both fascism and Christianity.

I already spot a problem here as I feel as if Pro's 3 and 1 are simply the same point worded in a different way to seem t come at an alternate angle so at the moment I want to point out that if Con disproves 1 or 3 he inherently has disproven the other.

Pro then goes on to state things such as Fascists loving their neighbors (this has barely ever been the case in history) but since Con never directly addressed the neighbor point, I'll just let it be. Pro then carries out a play-on-words alternating Christianity and Fascism in a quote but never once explains why the Christianity version of the quote is valid or relevant to Christianity he only remarks 'I admit it is shocking how well that synergizes.' which is appealing to emotion rather than reason. Also, 'B' was supposed to be Christian doctrine not playing on words from Fascist doctrine and claiming it to be Christian Doctrine.

As for the 'spiritual' references in both Christian and Fascist doctrine, this hardly proves that they are similar or related but I will admit that it is perhaps a valid similarity between Christianity and Fascism.
Posted by Tough 1 year ago
Tough
RFD Part 2 'Con's Case'
Now we move onto Con's opening case:

Con's case essentially attempts to run the logic of Communism (the Totalitarian form) being the closest political system to Fascism. The immediate thought that came to my mind is that even if he could prove this to be true the resolution could still be true regardless.

Pro immediately jumps on this loophole in Round 3 stating '. I am not arguing that Christianity is fascist, rather that they are akin.' I also noticed that Con never rebutted any of the three core arguments of Pro yet.

Here is where it began to get interesting because Con did the unthinkable, he ran a flawed angle, got called out on the flaw of the angle and just kept at it... Doom ahead is what I thought!

As if by magic, when reading Con's Round 3 I began to see what he was actually running as a case;

1) Christianity is akin to Totalitarian Communism
2) Things akin to Totalitarian Communism cannot be akin to Fascism

This in itself seems flawed until he breaks it down and begins to display certain contradictions between Fascism and Totalitarian Communism.

Con provides two quotes from the Bible, the first displaying that all those who served god were of 'one heart and one soul' rather than classing, the Bible seems to unite them in one united 'class' or 'soul/heart'. Rather than addressing this, Pro chooses to totally ignore it an only rebut the other points. The second quote provided by Con is one that it prevents the selling of land/property which is definitely not something Fascism encourages but rather Totalitarian Communism does.
Posted by Tough 1 year ago
Tough
RFD Part 3.1 'Rebuttals'

Pro states that despite the fact that property ownership and classlessness are both discouraged by Christianity, it is still akin to Fascism. Not only is Pro missing out the fact that their 3 points had one that said Christianity encourages classes but Pro is also ignoring that Con explained how the 'all-powerful' god is far more akin to a Totalitarian Communist leader than a Fascist one and that since 2 thigns totally contradict Fascism to suggest they akin is absurd.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
kasmiclannan13
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: The essential tension in this debate is not between fascism and communism, but between akin and not akin. Both sides recognize this to a degree, but Con's argument is more focused on the former while Pro's is focused on the latter. Con argues that every similarity to communism is a dissimilarity to fascism, and while I do buy that, it's not really challenging the central assumption that Christianity bears striking similarities to fascism. I don't see why my accepting Pro's arguments from the opening round isn't sufficient to meet his BoP. The argument might be that if there are more dissimilarities than similarities, then they are not akin, but if I'm looking just at numbers, it would be 5:2 in favor of Pro. I don't even need to go that far, though, since I could perceive just dropping Pro's opening arguments as reason enough to vote his direction. He proved that Christianity is akin to fascism in those ways, which appears to be all he has to do to meet his BoP. So I vote Pro.
Vote Placed by Tough 1 year ago
Tough
kasmiclannan13
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: RFd in comments.
Vote Placed by Romanii 1 year ago
Romanii
kasmiclannan13
Who won the debate:Vote Checkmark-
Reasons for voting decision: This debate came down to the definition of "akin", and Con's mistake was allowing Pro to dictate what exactly that means. Pro and Con both provide compelling cases demonstrating that Christianity shares some major characteristics with Fascism and Communism, respectively. However, Pro then argues that Communism is akin to Fascism as well and therefore the resolution is still affirmed via transitive property. This assumes that all that's necessary for two things to be "akin" to each other is for them to share at least a single fundamental characteristic, but I never see Con directly contest that assumption. All Con really had to do was explicitly argue that having fundamental differences negates "akin-ness" (since I do think he successfully pointed out some major differences), but he let Pro's interpretation stand, and therefore Pro's argument regarding the systems' shared authoritarian principles is sufficient to show that they are "akin" to each other. Thus, I vote Pro.