The Instigator
IanScottWilson
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Con (against)
Winning
13 Points

Communism is Good

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 2 votes the winner is...
socialpinko
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/11/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,453 times Debate No: 26167
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

IanScottWilson

Pro

There will be 3 real rounds, this first post is to introduce the debate. My opponent should post after this, accepting the challenge.
socialpinko

Con

I accept. Some definitions are in order.


Communism is "the political and economic doctrine that aims to replace private property and a profit-based economy with public ownership and communal control of at least the major means of production (e.g., mines, mills, and factories) and the natural resources of a society."[1] Communism comes in two basic forms, Marxism and anarchist communism. The primary difference between the two is that Marxism advocates a transitory state of lower communism (state socialism) in order to bring about communism whereas anarchist communism supports a more direct transition. I'm not sure which form Pro is planning to use, but am fine arguing against either.


Obviously there isn't any clear cut and objective definition of what constitutes something being good. However, we can use general markers to indicate this, such as communism's position relative to other social systems (e.g. capitalism), the general quality of life under communism, whether or not communism actually reaches the goals seeks to achieve, etc.


===Sources===


[1] http://www.britannica.com...
Debate Round No. 1
IanScottWilson

Pro

IanScottWilson forfeited this round.
socialpinko

Con

Since I don't think Pro has any intention of debating this issue, I'll only post a rudimentary case.


The main reasoning against economic central planning of any kind is that under it, rational allocation or coordination of resources becomes impossible. The reason this is so is because centrally coordinated economies lack a pricing mechanism which signals the levels of relative supply and demand. This form of critique is known as the calculation problem, originally formulated by Ludwig von Mises. Mises writes:


"It seems tempting to try to construct by analogy a separate estimation of the particular production groups in the socialist state also. But it is quite impossible. For each separate calculation of the particular branches of one and the same enterprise depends exclusively on the fact that is precisely in market dealings that market prices to be taken as the bases of calculation are formed for all kinds of goods and labor employed. Where there is no free market, there is no pricing mechanism; without a pricing mechanism, there is no economic calculation."


===Sources===


[1] "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth", Ludwig von Mises (http://mises.org...)
Debate Round No. 2
IanScottWilson

Pro

IanScottWilson forfeited this round.
socialpinko

Con

Extend refutation. Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
IanScottWilson

Pro

IanScottWilson forfeited this round.
socialpinko

Con

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
IanScottWilsonsocialpinkoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Super FF
Vote Placed by Ron-Paul 4 years ago
Ron-Paul
IanScottWilsonsocialpinkoTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Full FF.