The Instigator
Gaurdian_Rock
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
utahjoker
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

Communism is, on paper, the only good form of government

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 3 votes the winner is...
utahjoker
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/9/2013 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,353 times Debate No: 34633
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (3)

 

Gaurdian_Rock

Pro

First round is for acceptance only.
1. The BOP is shared
2. Any arguments pertaining to either, the USSR, China, Vietnam, Cuba, Laos, or North Korea are invalid, due to the fact that they have never been communist and never will be.
3. This is the only thing you may try and attack: http://www.marxists.org...
But I warn you, it has tons of Bullet proof logic.
Debate Round No. 1
Gaurdian_Rock

Pro

I would like to that utahjoker for accepting my debate, I note he will be a very challenging opponent, and look forward to this debate.


The Communist Manifesto can be broken down into multiple key points:


1: History can be viewed as a constant class struggle


Marx and Engel argued that history has always been the same, from living standards to revolutions and that often classes divide us more than nationality, and I will begin my analyzing this.


Living standards: Not so much to do with living standard but desire, want, it is these emotions like greed that have the potential to drive us apart, and ultimately separate us.


Revolutions: While this is not true for all revolutions it is for a great deal, France was divided in-half ultimely by Aristocracy and the very poor. In the case of France the very poor were starving, while the wealth were eating bread and other rarities, this wealth class was truly thriving off the fact that they were able to get away with exploiting the working class.


2. Society is splitting into the bourgeoisie and the Proletariat


For those of you who don’t know


Bourgeoisie: Capitalist


Proletariat: Average worker


So basically this point is summing up the fact that the capitalists have the ability to take control of means of production, transportation, and ultimate domination of the market. Huge problem here is that when a ruling elite has control of the whole of the country there power is limitless and they basically, become dictators.


3. In proportion as the bourgeoisie, i.e. capital, is developed, in the same proportion in the proletariat, the modern working class, developed- a class of laborers, who only live so long as they find work, and who fine work only so long as their labor increases capital


Ultimately stating that so long as the capitalists have control of, the capital, i.e. money, they control the working class and overall development of the proletariats as a whole class.


4. The immediate aim of the Communists is the same as that of all the other proletariat parties: formation of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of the bourgeoisie supremacy, conquest of political power by the proletariat


Removes ultimate power from the social elite and places it in the hands of the working class.


5. Communism deprives no man of the power to appropriate the products of society; all that it does is to deprive him of the power to subjugate the labor of others by means of such appropriation


Removes the ability of one man to hold control of another, creating equality among all people, and what else can I say but…




Small note: due the approach of finals I had to cut this short, meaning I never mentioned industrial armies or the such.

utahjoker

Con

I would like to thank my opponent before I begin.

I would like to argue that a democratic republic with a capitalist economy is a great form of government.

1: Class Struggle/ Economy

I would agree that class struggle has been a problem throughout history. The question always is how do you end this struggle between the classes. Communism gives the idea that you circle the wealth around, the rich will be kept down while the poor will be kept up causing a whole nation in a middle class, but there is a problem with this idea. The problem is greed; greed is very much apart of human nature. Humans always want to get more and be better and communism tries to end this by just ending it. That can't just happen saying something that makes humanity can't just end by a piece of paper. This is my analogy I use when comparing a communist economy to a capitalist economy. Lets say if in a class room we have a capitalist grading system, the people who listen the best and study the hardest will get a good grade while those who don't listen or study will in turn get a bad grade, so the people who want to get a better grade will work harder and become better. Than compare that to a communist grading system, there are still those who work hard and still those who don't, but instead of rewarding the hardest working with the best grade you take the average and give it to all of the people. Would is not be reasonable to believe that the hardest workers in the communist system stop working as hard because they don't get rewarded more for more work. While those in the capitalist system will continue with the hard work. The best way to end a class struggle is to have the government not treat any class better or worse, but allow the lower class to work hard and try to gain ground on the rich.

Why many of the past class revolutions occurred was because the government was treating the rich better and causing the poor to do much work without any reward. In a true capitalist free market no government involvement would equal better class relations.

2: Checks and Balances

The great thing about a democratic republic government is the checks and balances it has. The people check the government by voting who is in office. While the government checks its self by the three branches of power that all have a check on the other. The problem with communism is that true communism is supposed to end with a peaceful anarchy. The people control everything and this will cause a classless society. The problem is that people naturally want structure. Democratic republic does this by having checks on its structure.

A Democratic republic is a great government on paper and even in true practice. So the idea that communism is the only good form of government on paper is wrong.
Debate Round No. 2
Gaurdian_Rock

Pro

Extend all arguments
Class Struggle:
con agree's that it has been a part of human struggle and re aferms my point.

Checks and Balence:
Having a middle class that evryone is in IS structure, and might remind you that this is on PAPER, and so any arguements pretaining to prctice in the world are completely irelivant..

Also, I must unfortunalty end this debate with finals next week I simply dont have time for this right now...
I hope utahjoker would please end this debate where it can be picked up later, and I encourage people not to vote,
My apoligizes,
G-Rock
utahjoker

Con

Communism is not the only government that sounds good on paper.

Democracy sounds great because the people are able to directly contribute to their government.

Fascism sounds great because it is all about control so nobody rises up.

Anarchy sounds great because there is no government to hold anyone down,

While this debate is about government on paper I have shown that there are more than just one that sounds great on paper.

Vote con.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Gaurdian_Rock 3 years ago
Gaurdian_Rock
Ahhh but how good is democracy?!
Democracy: where any two idiots can outvote a genius....
Posted by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
If it can't translate into practice, then it's no good on paper anyways. It might look good, but that's not the same as being good.
Posted by Gaurdian_Rock 3 years ago
Gaurdian_Rock
I admit that I set myself a huge BoP, and made the mistake of saying it was the only good form, thats being said I encourage everyone to vote for con.
Posted by Guy_D 3 years ago
Guy_D
In many cases, it doesn't matter how good something looks on paper. What we experience in reality is a bastardized version of economic systems. Humans are always messing things up.
Posted by Gaurdian_Rock 3 years ago
Gaurdian_Rock
True, but I remind you that this debate is one on paper. xD
Posted by elvroin_vonn_trazem 3 years ago
elvroin_vonn_trazem
It is my understanding that the Ancient Inca culture was pretty close to being an ideal Communism. If one reads the descriptions carefully, though, it is apparent that a Pure Communism and a Pure Democracy are actually very close to each other. The main difference is, a Democracy is a system in which each individual has an opportunity to try to convince others to do things HIS (or HER) Way, while in a Communism everyone is supposed to (somehow) automatically know what is the Best Way. And that, the uncertainty of knowing, is precisely why a Pure Communism can't actually work in the long long run. Remember, even the Incas had a Top-Dog type at the pinnacle of their society.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by gt4o2007 3 years ago
gt4o2007
Gaurdian_RockutahjokerTied
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: Since it was said that it is the "Only" one joker won by default but also provided a very good argument against it.
Vote Placed by Juris_Naturalis 3 years ago
Juris_Naturalis
Gaurdian_RockutahjokerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 couldn't uphold his burden of proof.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Gaurdian_RockutahjokerTied
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 set himself a high BoP and was unable to refute that other forms of government also look good on paper (his argument could have supported communism being the best form on paper...). As for the comment about finals, it seems moot due to coming up on the closing round.