The Instigator
Gaurdian_Rock
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
THElittleRISK
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Communism is a logical solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
THElittleRISK
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/16/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,079 times Debate No: 34813
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

Gaurdian_Rock

Pro

First round is for acceptance
THElittleRISK

Con

I wish my opponent well on this debate.

My opponent will be arguing communism is a logical solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, I will be arguing that it is not.

Since my opponent did not provide definitions, I will:

Communism:
1.) A theory advocating elimination of private property
2.) A system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed.
(http://www.merriam-webster.com...)

Logical:
1.) Of or according to the rules of logic or formal argument: "a logical impossibility".
2.) Characterized by clear, sound reasoning.

Israeli-Palestinian conflict:
The ongoing dispute between the Jewish and Arab populations in the former Ottoman Empire region of Palestine, consisting of the state of Israel, the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip
(http://www.chegg.com...)

I look forward to my opponent's opening argument.
Debate Round No. 1
Gaurdian_Rock

Pro

I would first like to correctly define communism...
Communism: A political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs, a society where the proletariat and bourgeois become absorbed into one party.
As for the other definition I accept then and would like to note that the BoP is shared, all I must do to win is prove it is a logical solution , while my opponent will try and prove how it is not in any way logical.

The installment of a communist government would combine the ethnicities of Israelis and Palestinians under one government, uniting the two people. This would also end any territorial disputes because through the government there would be equal distribution of land and property rights. Any class systems would vanish because everyone would become equal. This would also eliminate the large gap between wealthy and poor that plagues the Palestinian populace and allows the Israelis to keep power. And unlike a parallel state solution this would solve the problem of unity by having the one communist party be made up of Palestinians and Israelis alike. For instance instead of a weak umbrella government that will get nothing done there will be one strong central government that will quickly reach a solution that is best for the state and people. Communism is also superior to a two state solution, because instead of two governments that would constantly be invading each other it would bring them together. It is also superior then a single state solution, because, like Zionist Vladimir Jabotinsky warned “Native resistance to dispossession is irrepressible and Zionism would only survive with constant force to quell it.” This statement reinforces the fact that a single state solution could not unify without the use of a constant force to suppress the people, this plan would of course be enforced by China.
Each point that has been made here exemplifies why this solution is the only one that could be a long lasting affective solution. And for those of you out there look down on communism have no to right to do so because of what China has done. Consequently it has worked very well for China, as a result of communism it has become the largest exporter of fabricated goods in the world today. It also has one of the largest infrastructures in the world to attribute to its success, but this is a result of a communist government. China’s environment is not a result of communism, which never states that the destruction of and ecology is necessary. China’s environment is a result of poor leadership and indifference not communism.

It is for these reason that communism is a highly logical solution to the conflict.

THElittleRISK

Con

My opponent argues that a communist government would unite Palestinians and Israelis because it would "combine their ethnicities". Forcing two groups of people who are deeply hostile to one another to live together is very unlikely to produce good results. It wouldn't "combine their ethnicities" it would just make tensions worse. My opponent argues that since communism distributes land equally, there would be no more territorial disputes. Neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians want equal land redistribution. The vast majority of Palestinians want an independent state--a fully realized and truly independent state--in the West Bank and Gaza with East Jerusalem as its capital (1). This means firstly that forcing the two countries together would be against the wishes of there people, and secondly that equal land distribution would not please either group. My opponent also argues that "Any class systems would vanish because everyone would become equal. This would also eliminate the large gap between wealthy and poor that plagues the Palestinian populace and allows the Israelis to keep power." Under ideal communism perhaps, but in practice in every "communist" country classes still existed, it would be very, very unlikely. My opponent argues that "unlike a parallel state solution this would solve the problem of unity by having the one communist party be made up of Palestinians and Israelis alike." Once again, the entire goal of the Palestinian people is to have INDEPENDENCE. What evidence is there that shows that the only alternative to a "strong central government" is a weak umbrella one? Once more, forcing them into becoming ONE people would be one of the worst things for both sides because the Palestinians want independence more than anything else. You argue that a single state solution would not unify the two groups without the constant use of force, when under your proposal of communism Israel and Palestine would be magically united without the use of force? What does China have to do with this debate? This is a debate about ISRAEL and PALESTINE, not CHINA. That entire paragraph is totally off topic, and on top of that inaccurate. Go look up the name Deng Xiaoping and then come back and tell me how "communist" China is. Communism would not solve any of the key issues of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It is also highly unrealistic and illogical since it would not be supported by either of the people seeing as Israel is a very capitalist country and Palestine's entire goal is independence.

Communism is not a logical answer to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because it would not effectively solve any of the key issues, is not practically realistic, and would never be supported by the people.

(1) http://www.endtheoccupation.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Gaurdian_Rock

Pro

I thank my opponent, for his well thought out and executed response. (No really you totally killed it)

Forcing two groups of people who are deeply hostile to one another to live together is very unlikely to produce good results.”

Must remind you that in the Communist Manifesto, Marx describes history as a class struggle, and that class ultimately divided us more than race and ethnicity, so according to the resolution “communism is a logical solution to the conflict” this is since confirmed because, we must face the facts all the Palestinians want is really equality, and the absorption and formation of a proletariat class is key to a happy society.

“Neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians want equal land redistribution. The vast majority of Palestinians want an independent state”

Okay so here’s where I get to attack a two state solution, with a question. What happened in 1948, when the British removed troops from Palestine and the Israelis declared independence? What happened was the Palestinians immediately started uprising and six other Arab countries attacks. In my statements I addressed this by saying that the two countries would be at a constant struggle with each other, and therefore, the statement about equal distribution of land is met and affirmed.

This would also eliminate the large gap between wealthy and poor that plagues the Palestinian populace and allows the Israelis to keep power." Under ideal communism perhaps, but in practice in every "communist" country classes still existed, it would be very, very unlikely.

I’ll dispute your statement by saying there has never been a true communist country ever, and according to the definition agreed upon, this would work in alleviating tensions, therefore this is also a logical answer.

Once again, the entire goal of the Palestinian people is to have INDEPENDENCE. What evidence is there that shows that the only alternative to a "strong central government" is a weak umbrella one? Once more, forcing them into becoming ONE people would be one of the worst things for both sides because the Palestinians want independence more than anything else.

It seems my opponent was not smart enough to catch this but, it has been my goal to attack every one of the proposed resolution to institute there flaws and irrationality’s, so that I could prove communism is a rational option. And you need to understand that no matter how much the Palestinians want independence, the resolution has to be equal and fair for both sides, and that is why REAL communism is a rational solution as it is for most other world problems.

You argue that a single state solution would not unify the two groups without the constant use of force, when under your proposal of communism Israel and Palestine would be magically united without the use of force?

First of all sir don’t talk lightly about magic around me I am a level 69 goblin virgin mage. :P And yes once again like Marx said “history can be viewed as a constant class struggle” so under this statement yes, the formation of the Israelis and Palestinians into a single proletariat would solve all problems of unity.

This is a debate about ISRAEL and PALESTINE, not CHINA.

Geez did your caps lock button have a seizure or something? This was simply to state that the rise of Maoism has worked very well for China and Maoism is a distort form of communism.

It is also highly unrealistic and illogical since it would not be supported by either of the people seeing as Israel is a very capitalist country

Okay, um ill just pretend you thought that one out and did not just say that…

And so it is clear that TRUE communism would be a logical solution to the problem and that is all I had to prove, I never had to prove whether it would work (even though I did), and I have proven why it is logical and refuted all my opponents points, the victory is mine.

Vote Pro!!!

Sources:

1: http://www.marxists.org...

2: http://en.wikipedia.org...

3: http://en.wikipedia.org...

THElittleRISK

Con

I thank my opponent in return for his good sportsmanship.

"Forcing two groups of people who are deeply hostile to one another to live together is very unlikely to produce good results."

They are hostile to each other for complex historical reasons, communism will not make that go away overnight. Once more, all the Palestinians want is independence, not equality. (1) There's a reason why the Palestinian Liberation Organizations is recognized as the sole representative of the Palestinian people.

"Neither the Israelis nor the Palestinians want equal land redistribution. The vast majority of Palestinians want an independent state"

The outcome of war such as the one that occurred in 1948 is unlikely to reoccur for three reasons. 1.) The Palestinians would be getting what they wanted, unlike in 1948. 2.) The PLO has denounced violence and terrorism and become an observer state in the UN. 3.) By recognizing Palestinian independence, Israel would be improving relations with its Arab neighbors, not hurting them.

This would also eliminate the large gap between wealthy and poor that plagues the Palestinian populace and allows the Israelis to keep power." Under ideal communism perhaps, but in practice in every "communist" country classes still existed, it would be very, very unlikely.

If there has never been a communist country ever, what makes you think Israel could be the first one? This is an illogical answer because it is simply not realistic.

Once again, the entire goal of the Palestinian people is to have INDEPENDENCE. What evidence is there that shows that the only alternative to a "strong central government" is a weak umbrella one? Once more, forcing them into becoming ONE people would be one of the worst things for both sides because the Palestinians want independence more than anything else.

Just because every other option has flaws does not immediately mean that communism isn't a flawed option as well. "Real" communism under your own definition advocates class war, and something tells me that a class war wouldn't lessen the violence between Israel and Palestine. It is possible to have a fair and equal two state solution as well.

I would like to congratulate my opponent on achieving the prestigious rank of "Level 69 goblin virgin mage". Once again, and I really don't know how many times I can emphasize this, the Palestinians want independence more than anything, and the Israelis want security. (2) Even now the Palestinians and Israelis live in relative separation. By forcing them together the Palestinians would be deprived of their independence, and as such would very likely lash out against Israel. This already happened in the "al-Aqsa Intifada" (3) Thus, the Palestinians would be denied their independence and the Israelis their security, meaning that neither faction had their main goal met, making communism a highly illogical solution once more.

This is a debate about ISRAEL and PALESTINE, not CHINA.

I used caps lock because you seem to get distracted from the argument easily and typed up a whole pointless paragraph about China, which has nothing to do with Israel and Palestine. If you would like to argue the merits of Maoism, please save it for another debate.

It is also highly unrealistic and illogical since it would not be supported by either of the people seeing as Israel is a very capitalist country

What I meant is that Israel operates under a capitalist economic system, and that it's main export and import partner (4) as well as military ally is the United States, which would probably not take kindly to its main ally in the Middle East to turning communist.

"True" communism would not work because as I have proven it would not help solve any of the main issues of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, would not give either faction what they wanted, and would simply not be supported by the people. I'm sorry to be the one to tell you this, but in order to be logical something has to work practically, so you can't use semantics to try to distort the argument.

Vote Con!

Sources:
1.) http://www.endtheoccupation.org...
2.) http://www.endtheoccupation.org...
3.) http://www.endtheoccupation.org...
4.) http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by ArgentStorm 3 years ago
ArgentStorm
Pro seems to have a very superficial understanding of communism. Just because history can be described as a class struggle does not mean that every single disagreement is, in fact, the result of class struggle. Additionally, arguing that true communism is a rational solution to a real problem is pure folly when it has been demonstrated time and again that communism is not achievable.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by calculatedr1sk 3 years ago
calculatedr1sk
Gaurdian_RockTHElittleRISKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro actually had a fairly easy resolution, because his claim is that Communism is "a" solution and not necessarily "the best" solution. I did see disjointed advocation of some of the benefits of Communism, but I didn't see any attempt at forming a logical sequence of premises that brings us to the unavoidable conclusion that Commusim is a solution. This is partly due to the success of Con to emphasize Palestinian desire for independence as a key driver to the conflict, and communism does not seem to have the tools to resolve this.
Vote Placed by ConservativePolitico 3 years ago
ConservativePolitico
Gaurdian_RockTHElittleRISKTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: PRO shows no good reasons how Communism truly solves the problems in Israel-Palestine. CON rightly shows how putting a Communist government over their heads doesn't solve their tensions, hostilities etc but rather just throw something on top of the two groups. The BOP was not met by PRO so CON gets the arguments win.