The Instigator
SocialistRI82
Pro (for)
Losing
15 Points
The Contender
Partyboat
Con (against)
Winning
33 Points

Communism is the form of government we should have in the United States.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/23/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,673 times Debate No: 865
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (16)

 

SocialistRI82

Pro

Our current system of government is currently selling away America's middle class. No longer can the average American hope to prosper. The days of the factory worker buying a home and supporting his family are over. Our minimum wage cannot even keep up with the rising prices of home heating oil, gasoline for his car, or even food for his stomach. We have become pawns for corporate interests. Selling away our future for the good of only a small percentage of people. I believe that only through a communist political structure can we realize our countries true potential. A system that has the good of all in mind. I am not going to use Stalin, or Castro as a model of my claims. I feel their forms of communism can be better categorized as tyrannical dictatorships. However I will use Karl Marx's model. One in which the state controls the means of production. One in which each is given according to his work. One in which everyones basic needs are met for. Given America's massive industrial capacity it would not be a difficult move. Instead of the corporations worrying only of their own profit, the state will have the needs of the people as a whole in mind. No longer will jobs be outsourced overseas to meet a cheaper solution. Capitalism has only bred us a society of materialism. Materialism at the expense of workers, and the greater good of the country. Communism in its purest application will maintain a standard of living for all. Furthermore I believe in communisms economic philosophy. That of a planned economy. I feel that by having a planned economy system the state can control the price of goods/services. We can ensure that the wealth of our resources is evenly distributed amongst the people. We can maximize our own output, as well as our own wealth. I feel we can maintain property rights, however the state will be tasked to ensure that certain resources of land be free from private purchase. This will enable the state to ensure that environmental standards are kept, and that nature is protected. Overall I feel this system is only the next logical step in our countries political evolution. We have created a huge industrial capacity, and a massive amount of wealth. The logical next step is to apply that wealth and our position in the world to the greater good of our people. A concept that capitalism has abandoned. Look to US oil company profits, the trend of outsourcing, our failing health care system, the state of dismay our social security system is in, and the wars of corporate conquest in the middle east as evidence of capitalism's moral decline. I do not feel there is any other system that could provide as much for the people as communism.
Partyboat

Con

Communism is by far the best form of government on paper, but in reality it doesn't work well. Communism makes everyone an equal, and no matter what their is no chance improve your income. So say if a janitor is being paid as much as a doctor what is the point of trying? There is no incentive to do better then your rival, because at the end of the day you get the same check as everyone else. Your suggestion to change America from a constitutional republic to a communist state is near impossible. People who strive for success and who are already successful won't agree with the change.

By changing the government your goal is to help the poor. The poor only make up a small percent of our country. Also most peoples basic needs are meet. By attempting to change how the country is ran you could damage our society. Since by human nature we all strive for better things, which leads to greed. When you eliminate that strive why should anyone do anything?

Also you state it will stop outsourcing. Well an easier solution to that is banning outsourcing. By passing laws saying the majority to all jobs need to stay in the US. I am not saying I agree with this, but outsourcing isn't a negative thing. By outsourcing jobs you decrease the amount it costs to produce a product, which will cause more competition between big corporations. Also you are suppling jobs to countries which need them.
Debate Round No. 1
SocialistRI82

Pro

I agree that a janitor and a doctor cannot make the same amount of money. To each his own share will be based on his/her work. A doctor is going to make more than a janitor given the doctor's job requires more expertise than a janitor. I will agree that previous attempts at communism have failed. Corruption and the like were responsible. However no country has ever attempted pure Marxian Communism. I disagree with your assertion that outsourcing is a good thing, in that it creates competition. This would be true only if the competition was a result. Instead of this "created competition" we end up seeing a copycat effect. Other companies realizing the advantages economically to going overseas are now following suit. So the competition no longer benefits the people, but the companies in their search for cheaper and cheaper labor. The company has no stake in the people of this country. They are only looking to meet there money numbers. So in essence the argument that this is somehow beneficial is laughable. It has helped to increase a trade deficit within this country, reduce jobs to the people of this country, and further the expansion of cheap labor. The people doing the work for these companies are not recieving American wages, not recieving workers compensation benefits, and the list goes on. This is a system of exploitation. In a communist system these worries will no longer exist. The good of the people would be first priority. You also stated that you could simply ban outsourcing through legislation. Heres the question though, what keeps these companies from simply closing down American operations and simply moving there operations overseas? That would most certainly be the outcome of such a move. I have not been swayed by any aspect of your previous argument. Planned economies, and a communist structure would allow this country to maximize its production, and control the distribution of the wealth. No other system can afford such protections the the people.
Partyboat

Con

"To each his own share will be based on his/her work. A doctor is going to make more than a janitor given the doctor's job requires more expertise than a janitor."

Isn't the purpose of communism making everyone equal? If that is the case then giving the doctor a higher salary because he did more work, defeats the purpose of communism.

"The people doing the work for these companies are not recieving American wages, not recieving workers compensation benefits, and the list goes on."

The purpose of outsourcing is to increase the profit of the company. If other countries decided to make decent labor laws this wouldn't be a factor. Also they shouldn't recieve American wages since they do not work in America. But enough on outsource since it is straying from the original topic.

"I will agree that previous attempts at communism have failed. Corruption and the like were responsible. However no country has ever attempted pure Marxian Communism."

Also what stops the the leaders from going corrupt and destroying the country. There won't be any checks or balances on the government system, correct?

Also you state that there would be controlled distribution of wealth to all parties correct? How does the communist government plan on taking the wealth from the rich in our country. I'm going to assume the government are going to use force in order to take it, in which case would cause liberty problem. Also since everyone should be earning the same amount that would include government officials.

I also forgot something from the first debate.

"I feel we can maintain property rights, however the state will be tasked to ensure that certain resources of land be free from private purchase."

Will the government be taking the land from people and be evenly distributing to all. If so this also is an invasion of liberty and rights. Essentially a new constitution would need to be written along with all political officials being overthrown.
Debate Round No. 2
SocialistRI82

Pro

"Isn't the purpose of communism making everyone equal? If that is the case then giving the doctor a higher salary because he did more work, defeats the purpose of communism"

-The purpose of communism is not to have everyone making the exact same wage. If that were the case no one would have the motivation to do anything of importance. You are more than likely referring to Stalin-like models of communism. To each his share, given what his/her work is. The purpose of communism in this regard is to ensure that all are given a liveable income. To ensure that the profits are distributed among the people.

You stated, "Also what stops the the leaders from going corrupt and destroying the country. There won't be any checks or balances on the government system, correct?"

-This is simply not true. Again you have fallen into the Stalin model of communism. There will be checks and balances since the people will still be electing the leaders. There will still be a congress which will keep in mind the laws, as well as serve as a liaison for state run resources. Corruption will be prevented through the transparency which the state will act on all subjects. That is they will be reporting to the people what is going on in government.

"Also you state that there would be controlled distribution of wealth to all parties correct? How does the communist government plan on taking the wealth from the rich in our country. I'm going to assume the government are going to use force in order to take it, in which case would cause liberty problem. Also since everyone should be earning the same amount that would include government officials"

Government will not eliminate all business. They will control the means of production. So yes, many companies will be purchased by the state similar to imminent domain. There will be no taking of things by force. The owners will be compensated for there lands/businesses. Again when you claim the equal wages you are applying it to generally.

Your final argument was in regards to "Will the government be taking the land from people and be evenly distributing to all. If so this also is an invasion of liberty and rights. Essentially a new constitution would need to be written along with all political officials being overthrown."

-You are correct in that the constitution would have to be changed and pretty much the entire system must be overthrown. That much is true. However that course would have to be taken given the tremendous amount of corruption and cronyism that currently infects our government. It would have to take place over time so as to ensure the stability of the economy during the transition. NOT all land would be seized. Simply the means of production would be seized. Laws would be enacted to regulate the owners rights with regards to renting, and usage.

In essence this form of government we currently have is willing itself into none existence. The wasteful practices are destroying our resources, and of capital. I realize that you don't care to discuss outsourcing, but it does figure in greatly as an example of how capitalism will destroy itself. Granted we may not care what happens to the worker overseas, but I do care that the overseas worker is taking work away from American workers. You argue that this is fine due to the company enhancing its profits. What does this do for America?? These companies were given tax cuts so they could hire more workers (AMERICAN). Instead they took there tax cuts, went overseas to further make more money, and enhanced their profits even further. This type of exploitation of the system by the corporations is what is hurting us. Communism eliminates that outright. No longer will the people be exploited for the profits of a small % of people.

You have admitted right from the get-go that on paper this is the best form of government. Why then must we assume that it won't work. I feel the only reason people would not embrace this is due to greed. Given there are more than enough resources for all to live a high standard of living why is it that only a small number reap the benefits of the work that the average Joe does?? Basically communism makes things fair. Forces things to be fair for all. No other system can do that.
Partyboat

Con

I'd like to thank you this was a fun debate, and I learned a lot.

First off you are saying that the government will be taking most of the businesses by imminent domain. That is still forcing the people to let go of their businesses. I don't agree imminent domain right now as it is, so if the people don't want to sell they don't really have a choice do they.

In outsourcing, the heads that make those decisions are doing what they are suppose to. They are making their business profit, and unfortunately other people get hurt in the process. People will get hurt no matter what actions you take. Our current needs to pass legislation in order to prevent companies from outsourcing. I don't agree with it, but I am just telling you how it works.

"You have admitted right from the get-go that on paper this is the best form of government. Why then must we assume that it won't work. I feel the only reason people would not embrace this is due to greed. Given there are more than enough resources for all to live a high standard of living why is it that only a small number reap the benefits of the work that the average Joe does?? Basically communism makes things fair. Forces things to be fair for all. No other system can do that."

I did admit that communism is the best on paper in a sense. The reason I say in a sense is because if everything is fair then nothing lets us achieve more. Also greed is a natural thing in all humans. Everyone strives to do better and it is impossible to eliminate that factor. Not everything is better because it is fair.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Cindela 9 years ago
Cindela
Socialist,
Please don't try to continue the debate in the comments. It's cheap and just shows that you can't let go.
Posted by SocialistRI82 9 years ago
SocialistRI82
To suggest that because of a level playing field that people will not strive for better is wrong. I say this because I apparently did not make clear the fact that PEOPLE WILL NOT ALL BE PAID THE SAME. It will be based on their work. People if given the educational opportunity will strive for better. Instead of isolating educational opportunities to those who have the coin to pay for, communism advocates given the opportunity to all the be able to strive for better. Even without fear of drowning in school loan debts after they finish. I agree that greed is an unsolvable problem throughout humanity, however I also realize that greed does not drive us all. There would be great responsibility on the shoulders of voters to ensure that the officials they elect to lead our country don't harbor the greedy tendencies. No different than us electing a president currently. I'm not saying that our leaders would be placed in power by default, they would still have to carry the majority vote of the people.
-I thank you for the debate, and hope at some point we can further examine this issue in the future.
Posted by AdamCW12 9 years ago
AdamCW12
people have a lust for power there for communism works on paper and no where else....
Posted by drumbum565 9 years ago
drumbum565
Very close neck and neck till the final con. Personally I agree with the Con however I don't feel the con sufficiently covered the debate in their last speech if you will. And your whole outsourcing argument is flawed to say the least. Yes prices will go down due to outsourcing but if there aren't any jobs how are people going to buy the cheaper products?
16 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Cindela 9 years ago
Cindela
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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 
Vote Placed by double_edged_words 9 years ago
double_edged_words
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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 
Vote Placed by Chob 9 years ago
Chob
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by thatmanguy 9 years ago
thatmanguy
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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 
Vote Placed by fenderjazzerguy 9 years ago
fenderjazzerguy
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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 
Vote Placed by rclinken 9 years ago
rclinken
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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 
Vote Placed by Vlast 9 years ago
Vlast
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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 
Vote Placed by hjfrutwiufy 9 years ago
hjfrutwiufy
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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 
Vote Placed by A-ThiestSocialist 9 years ago
A-ThiestSocialist
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by SocialistRI82 9 years ago
SocialistRI82
SocialistRI82PartyboatTied
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:30