The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

Communism vs. Capitalism

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/22/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 7,963 times Debate No: 18925
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)




The premise is that Communism is not a bad form of Government.
Pro will be backing communism
Con will be backing capitalism
First round - Description of both forms of Government.
Second Round - Arguments for both forms of government.
Third Round - Rebuttal Round.

Communism is the practice in which all things are owned by the government, and as such all people are equal and should have equal possessions. It was envisioned by Karl Marx and adopted by the Bolsheviks in Russia after the Russian Revolution of 1917. Communism focuse on the establishment of a classless society. Communism was gradually phased out after the collapes of the USSR, and today the only "communist" (though only in name) nations are North Korea and Cuba.
I am challenging innomen to this debate. If he chooses to decline it, I will leave it open.


Capitalism at its heart is about freedom to do what you want, as long as it's justifiable. Communism sounds easy, but doesn't work. North Korea is communist, and their all starving to death, and are 8 inches shorter to their brothers to thee south. doctors say its because of mal nutrition. because the government does everything including rations. The USSR was also and they were a third world country other than their military.

Also capitalism rewards for hard work, aka if i work my @## of then I will get paid more, if I'm in Korea i will get just as much for being lazy. example cashiers get paid as much as doctors who are saving peoples lives. In capitalistic society You choose what you make and when you sell it. Unlike in communism where the government chooses everything, and decreases competition which is vital. Competition makes an economy work. It makes you make your goods better and cheaper then your neighbors, so basically making higher quality goods.
Debate Round No. 1


I agree that it did not work in North Korea and the Soviet Union, but I say that that was because of the people in charge, not the system itself. I agree, Communism has some flaws, but we are not talking about everyone, whatever their job, getting paid equally. We are talking about nobody being upper class and nobody lower class, because everything will be government-run. When the people in charge actually put real Communism in place, unlike the dictatorships in North Korea and the USSR, Communism works wonderfully. The best example is the shetl system in Israel, in which everyone has jobs, get their education paid for by the society, and then contribute to in in return, and everything is shared. The failures in USSR and NK were due to power-hungry people. This debate is about which system would be better if implemented properly, rather than used to take gain power. I await your argument.


O.K now I understand, this is a hypothetical what if communism was employed by a non-hunger thirsty person.

In theory this would work, but there are theory's against it. If everyone was paid the same it would create laziness. If everything is given to you why work as hard, just do the minimum. That's one reason. Also when the government runs anything it rarely works well. I can think of no governmental agency that works efficiently. So in that perspective that is a down fall of communism. Also many economists believe communism restricts an economy because of the laziness. So having a terrible eco0nomy will come no matter who is in control.

Once again capitalism means freedom, personal choice, and economic wealth. This is been proven in the U.S. The U.S. has the best economy in the world, and probably will for a long time. A communist might say its luck, but its not our economic philosophy gives you personal freedom. So its either you choose what you want to make, and where and when to make it, and who you are competing with, or the government owns you.

Also capitalism has brought you free trade, and everything you own (if you live in a capitalist country ). You will get better quality things because the people who bring it to you have decided they are interested in it so they work to be the best. They also need to be the best because they need to compete. So its simple, capitalism rocks. Also in most communist countries you don't get internet or phone. why? because their government is afraid that they will look up capitalism.

You said that in communism that the government owns you house. That is terrible,if they decide to hate you all they need to do is take take everything you own. And the more I think about it the less i see it possible to run communism o be run without a tyranny. So in fact if the government has that much power anyway it would easily slip into an oligarchy or a tyranny really fast.

Many people think we need communism to make a balance of supply and demand. this is absurd. In theory of capitalism the government stays out of the way except in extreme cases such as a monopoly. So if you look at it capitalism will balance itself on its own because if i have 10 pounds of sugar but the people want eleven, I just raise the price and people will slow their buying of my product until the supply gets bigger and prices get cheaper.

So here is my last statement of Americans, why fix something that isn't broke? And when it does break it heals later anyway, communism can't heal. if it goes down all you can do is try to stabilize.
Debate Round No. 2


I agree with you in that the present definiton of Communism has some flaws, but those are just organizational problems and can be worked out. The government will not be prejudiced against people and take away their amenities. A I said before, people will not be paid the same, they will get the same oppurtunities as everyone else, whatever their background. This is what Communism is about. Capitalism is not doing very well right now, with the debt crises in Europe and, to an extent, in the United States. This happened because the banks got too greedy and began lending people too much money, money which they could not repay, sinking the whole country into debt. In a communist society, this wouldn't happen because the banks would be regulated by the government, who would not have let this happen. In a capitalist scoiety, though you say it is a free market, in fact the top slots in all industries are taken and will not allow a newcomer into the field anmore. There is only limited oppurtunity in a capitalist society. I await your argument.


THE POINT OF COMMUNISM IS SO EVERYONE GETS PAID THE SAME! DUH! O.K. you say it's organizational problems. Well this is a fallacy. Here's why: When you have a strong government, it will usually end up in a situation with a power hungry representative takes control. So you saying if it was employed perfectly without a dictator is impossible.

As I have said before, I believe in free markets. Communism states that the government owns you, tells yo what to do, and when and were to sell it. These restrictions are what brought these countries to their knees in the cold war, their bad economy, not their dictators.

Capitalism isn't doing bad either. You never proved this with an example, So I will show you why it's not. Even in a recession America (capitalist) still has the strongest economy, by 4 trillion dollars ahead china who isn't technically in a recession. Oh and BTW Europe is socialist!

How is there less opportunity in capitalism? I have researched this, communism doesn't mean opportunity, freedom, or anything else good. It means fairness, but as I said before, you need competition to make an effective economy. And your wrong, big corporations have to let the lit ones survive (unless they want to buy it). You imply monopolies. Even in a capitalist society we have regulations to make it possible for the small to rise up. I have sated this before. In communism you aren't rewarded as much for your work. So if you work hard, advertise well, and practice your rights correctly, then you will be able to have endless opportunities which you just don't have in communism.

Since you have not said anything against all my other points effectively, my arguments still stand.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by darris321 6 years ago
There's a lot of speculation and no sources for nearly anything on either side.
Posted by 16kadams 6 years ago
Milton Friedman on free market hong Kong (when england still owned it) vs china:
Posted by innomen 6 years ago
I will accept this debate, but i would like you to first clarify the definition of communism, so that we might have a more clear resolution.
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 6 years ago
Belarus is arguably communist. Also, are we talking about Marxist Communism or fiscal communism, or what?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by imabench 6 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:42 
Reasons for voting decision: communist societies dont do well for many reasons that could be becasue of reasons other than communism. The Con's statements such as "if the government hates you then they can take everything you own" cost him conduct, but he did make some good points regarding capitalism so i threw him sources
Vote Placed by Lordknukle 6 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Poor debate . No sources for absolutely anything. In the end, con slightly came out on top.