The Instigator
chainmachine
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
wierdman
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Communism

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...
wierdman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/15/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 586 times Debate No: 21183
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (2)

 

chainmachine

Pro

I think Communism is the correct way to run a country.
wierdman

Con

This should be Interesting.

For clarification, I offer the following definitions:
Communism: 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 (http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu...)

correct: Free from error; in accordance with fact or truth. (as defined by http://www.thefreedictionary.com...)

run: operate (as defined by Google dictionary)

country: The people of a nation. (as defined by Google dictionary)

Thank you and I hope this debate willl be as fun as I envision it to be.
Debate Round No. 1
chainmachine

Pro

Indeed, I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate...

First off I would like to say that communism industrialized both Russia and China and was a key factor in modernizing Eastern Europe and Asia, that is the big piece of factual evidence we can most likely agree on. I cite the following sources to support my statement http://en.wikipedia.org... and http://en.wikipedia.org...

The industrialization of Russia, China, Laos, etc. etc. Made these countries much more powerful and helped make good health care programs and living conditions.
wierdman

Con

Since my opponent did not offer any parameters when it comes to the time period, I will be debating this based on current times and not based on past histories. I will however offer some past examples of failed communism, but my main argument as should my opponent's main argument should be centered on the present.

=======D

While communism might have industrialized both rusia and china as well as many Eastern European and Asian countries, we also find that it destroyed these countries at one point forcing them to modify there government and the way the country (The people of a nation). in Russia, communism not only destroyed the Russian society, but it destroyed the entire empire. Crushing its every remains and allowing socialism to sip the last blood drop. (http://www.boogieonline.com...) We find that both nations true were brought to power by communism; however, we find that as modernization brought to light its glory, both these nations rapidly fell. With communism still in play, we find that these countries continued to plummet as the years went by. There only savior again was not communism, but several reforms allowing for more freedom and opportunity. So ask yourself this, if communism is such a great way to govern the people of a nation, then why did they feel oppressed? why did they seek reforms? why so much blood loss? When asked this question, we find that the only explanation is that communism was not such a great ideal, but a form of a soul sucking, oppressive, form of a devil in government. http://www.hyperhistory.net...

Earlier, I defined a country as not a piece of land, but a body of people. So taking this in account, we can then look at how the people reacted to communism and how it affected there life before. Looking into most communist nations, we find that the same formula is always in occurrence, and the solutions always the same. Taking China and Russia for instance, communism did not guide its people, but oppressed them. This not only created a hole in the operation of the country (people of the nation), but it also resulted in massive blood loss thus further weakening the government. The fact that a nation cannot be effectively operated if the nation is oppressed. Going back to China and Russia, we find that these people were willing to die not because they do not value there lives, but because they thought and knew that unless the reacted, the oppression will continue. They knew that death was better than living a life were they were not able to run there own business, or where freedom was a talk of fiction. There is absolutely no way communism can be the correct way to operate a nation, if the nation is oppressed or unhappy.
Debate Round No. 2
chainmachine

Pro

Your entire argument is based around the fact that Communism is oppressive.

In Russia currently under "DEMOCRACY" which you seem to think of so highly there are massive protests and arrests. In China human trafficking rings and crime run wild, life is no better with democracy and a free market. Perhaps even worse, I cite sources to prove my point.

http://www.nationmaster.com...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
http://www.bbc.co.uk...
http://www.nationmaster.com...
http://www.humantrafficking.org...

While the USSR which was a communist ruled country has quite good crime rates.

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

CONCLUSION

I have debunked Cons argument and have proved that Communism is indeed an excellent way to run a country, I will lastly cite crime rates in Democracy's during the era when the USSR existed.

http://en.wikipedia.org...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
wierdman

Con

My opponent claims that democracy leads to protest's, however there are different levels of oppression and different levels of progression. When looking into communism, we find that the level of oppression it provides is far from minor blood shed, or minor riots, it is genocide. Lets now take a look at the riots my opponent claims was caused by democracy. to do so, we must look into the evidence provided by my opponent.

1. http://www.nationmaster.com...: This source basically says that the trafficking rate in china continues to grow. Looking into this issue we find that it is completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. The trafficking rate although a major issue, is not directly caused by democracy. My opponents citation states that the trafficking is caused by the citizens and international players and not by the government. Unless my opponent is able to provide a reliable evidence showing China's government as a whole involved in human trafficking, then this argument should be void. A small part of China's government involved in human trafficking cannot be evidence that democracy itself is responsible. http://www.centreforaviation.com... please look into the evidence I provided.

2. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...: This evidence documents certain protest against the government in Russia. Looking into this evidence, we find that the fact that these citizens are freely protesting and the highest injustice done so far, is the arrest of these protesters, is a sign that Russia, whether democratic or not, is doing far better than communist Russia. These people, Have been able to freely protest meaning that certain liberties formally given to them now exist. http://www.departments.bucknell.edu... please take a look at the Russian constitution. http://eng.yabloko.ru...

3.http://en.wikipedia.org...: this source makes absolutely no sense. It shall be taking lightly simply because it is a Wikipedia source. Looking into this evidence, we find that the soviet Union took away the basic rights of there citizen's. I then result in asking this question, Would you rather live in a democratic country such as the U.S, or a country such as the soviet with no liberty. Not only has history presented us with this answer, but it has provided several scenarios confirming this answer.

Lets now take a look into economy. A properly ran nation is one that allow its nation to partake in free market. With communism, a country does not have free market, but all enterprise is controlled by the government. We find that not only are these countries poorer than democratic country (Cuba Vs. U.S) , but we find that these nations are often less organized and more likely to fall apart (soviet Russia). The lack of free markets creates a situation in which there is no domestic competition in the market. This then delays progression and since the government is running the market, there is limited ideas and limited diversity. In today's world, a healthy public market competition is the base to a nations foundation. Without this, there is absolutely no way a country could play a huge or even honorable role in the global market. http://businesspan.com...

I look forward to my opponents argument.
Debate Round No. 3
chainmachine

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for his response. Still your facts are flawed.

.I This is somewhat of an off topic argument but still, wikipedia is a perfectly legitimate source. You cannot prove it is wrong, facts are facts.

.II The fact of the matter is all your argument is based around on is that my facts are incorrect. You attempt to provide sources but they really don't prove your points at all, so really arguing sources is stupid quite frankly.

.III Yes, if you want no crime you need to oppress the population. Life is not perfect but still I would choose no crime over government invasion of private life. That is a philosophical argument though, and the other thing is it is impossible to say that humans need freedom of speech, private lives, etc. etc. Why is all that neccassary? It can end up costing lives and promoting black markets. Communism does none of that because a market is not neccasary, it is about power to the people. In Cuba,Russia,China etc. etc. the Communist were put into power by the people.

.IV I never said that the government was involved with human trafficking you actually just added to my argument :D I said without a larger police force and army human trafficking is harder to control.

.V Capitalist countries fall apart all the time? And the USSR played a massive role in the economy it was a superpower. At certain points it had more money than the US and was perfectly well off, It was pressured by its argument with China and multiple sanctions and trade embargo's.

CONCLUSION

While my opponent makes good points he simply cannot refute the fact about low crime rates in communist countries and some of his arguments on the validity of my sources is flatly wrong. I urge a vote pro! Vote for safety and the well being of your family!
wierdman

Con

"I This is somewhat of an off topic argument but still, wikipedia is a perfectly legitimate source. You cannot prove it is wrong, facts are facts." I will advice you to look at this http://www.debate.org...

".II The fact of the matter is all your argument is based around on is that my facts are incorrect. You attempt to provide sources but they really don't prove your points at all, so really arguing sources is stupid quite frankly."

My opponent argues that arguing on sources is stupid; however a look into his previous arguments reveals the fact that he did not provide me with a case in which I could attack. He simply makes or provides simple sentences leaving me to base my knowledge on his stance on the citations provided. If my opponent is troubled by my attacks on the citations he provided, then I advice him to give to me his case showing his stance on the subject. Simply giving me a sentence or two does not provide me with enough to base your position on.

" the other thing is it is impossible to say that humans need freedom of speech, private lives, etc. etc. Why is all that neccassary? It can end up costing lives and promoting black markets. Communism does none of that because a market is not neccasary, it is about power to the people"
"Yes, if you want no crime you need to oppress the population" There is no such thing as no crime. With or without oppression, crime will still exist. In fact, it is more likely for crime to exist in a place lacking liberty as the nation feels the necessity to provide for itself what the government failed to provide for them whether legally or not. http://www.time.com...

My opponent seems to misunderstand the concept of communism. Communism is not power to the people, but power to the government. With power to the government, we find that the nation is oppressed by the government costing them all basic freedom. My opponent argument that a black market does not exist with communism, is not correct. Like proven in my previous arguments, communism in history has led to poverty and with poverty comes desperation. Desperation leads to crime as a nation crushed by economic instabilities is now looking for a place to get an item for a cheaper price. Desperation leads to the lack of care for consequences.

"I said without a larger police force and army human trafficking is harder to control."

A larger police force is not a proven solution to crime. In fact, it is more likely for a larger police force to contribute to crime as it is easier for a larger police force to get corrupted than a smaller police force. A larger police force is less likely to value integrity as it is less regulated. "officers from small agencies are more likely to view the discipline processes of their agency as fair when compared to officers from larger agencies" http://www.nationalpoliceresearch.org... please carefully read the evidence provided.

" And the USSR played a massive role in the economy it was a superpower."
While this might be true, we also find that they only enjoyed this super power for a short period of time before crumbling first by the hands of internal force, then corruption, and the International force. With democracy, we find that not only is Russia more economically stable, but it now holds a quite powerful position globally, in the EU as well as UN.

My opponent low crime rate is supported by a Wikipedia article. Please weigh that with my times article and see which is more reliable. I await my opponent' response.
Debate Round No. 4
chainmachine

Pro

USSR CRIME RATES

.I I have multiple sources citing the same evidence besides Wikipedia. Also you deem a magazine to be solid evidence, what is the difference between that and Wikipedia? Nothing, again facts are facts attacking my sources is simply ridiculous.

.II Yes it does not totally end I do deem myself wrong there, I think that's what we want though. If there is a police force in one country of 80,000 men with decent guns then they can moderately control crime. A country with 600,000 with a similar sized population will manage crime much better. So yes a large police force which communist countries have is why they have low crime rates.

.III There are multiple forms of Communism, your talking about Marxists concepts of a utopia. Real communism is about governments controlling the economy and well in that case almost everything. I think a government controlling things is good. It means that crime rates are very low, a person is not in fear of being murdered if they do their job assigned and work for the common good.
wierdman

Con

wierdman forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Lordknukle 2 years ago
Lordknukle
Pathetic.
Posted by wierdman 2 years ago
wierdman
I appologize for the forfiet. I can only post this in school due to some severe technical problems at home. I beg the voters to vote not on my forfiet but on my previous arguements. Thank you.
Posted by johnnyboy54 2 years ago
johnnyboy54
Those companies only sucessfully industrialized when they became capitalist
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
"The industrialization of Russia, China, Laos, etc. etc. Made these countries much more powerful and helped make good health care programs and living conditions."

Con will take this and run away with it...
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
Wanna debate communism with me later?
Posted by chainmachine 2 years ago
chainmachine
Again prove me wrong.
Posted by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
no
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 2 years ago
1dustpelt
chainmachinewierdmanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited. Con succesfully rebutted Pro's arguments.
Vote Placed by ConservativePolitico 2 years ago
ConservativePolitico
chainmachinewierdmanTied
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:15 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Pro for Con's FF in the final round. However Con refuted all of Pro's points and supplied excellent and reliable sources to back up his claims. Pro's argument sort of floundered in the face of Con's defenses.