The Instigator
yoda
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Mestari
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points

Does Communism Work?

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Mestari
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/4/2011 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,349 times Debate No: 19136
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (14)
Votes (1)

 

yoda

Con

Round 1 is acceptance, definitions, and rules.

Definitions
Communism - as defined by Karl Marx

Rules
Arguments in the comments section results in forfeiting the debate
You have 2,000 characters to complete your argument in.
This is a debate about Communism not Capitalism. Debating anything but Communism will result in forfeit of the debate.

Good luck Pro.
Mestari

Pro

I accept this debate and would like to offer several definitions:

Work [1]: The transfer of energy from one object to another.
Energy [2]: The capacity or power to do work by the application of force.
Force [3]: To make someone or something do something.

Furthermore, my opponent states that Communism will be defined by Karl Marx, but Karl has decided not to post his definition onto this debate; if my opponent wants to use a specific definition then he should refute mine in the next round.

Communism [4]: A specific stage of historical development that inevitably emerges from the development of the productive forces that leads to a superabundance of material wealth, allowing for distribution based on need and social relations based on freely associated individuals.

My opponent has also failed to establish a burden of proof. It is on the Con to prove that communism does not do work as he is the instigator and should be more prepared to prove his side than mine. If he wishes to oppose this burden, he is free to do so.

Finally, my opponent does not specify how to evaluate dropped arguments. If an argument is dropped, it shall be considered to be conceded as true.

I wish my opponent luck.

1. http://science.yourdictionary.com...
2. http://science.yourdictionary.com...
3. http://www.yourdictionary.com...
Debate Round No. 1
yoda

Con

Communism doesn't ever work. That is the point that I am arguing. Here is my reasoning.

1. Communism is strongly against freedom of speech.

2. The validity of Karl Marx's ideas is very easily challenged

3. Per Capita GDP in free countries is far better than in communist's governments.

Henceforth Communism does not ever work.

Freedom of speech is the right of all men. If you were to live in a communist state, would you like being told that you cannot spread your religion (if you are religious). Even worse is when you were told what you believe. It is no secret that Russia was forcing citizens to profess atheism. If you were a Boston Red Socks fan, would you like being told that you were a New York fan?

Karl Marx professes himself as the savior of the common worker. In the later parts of his life he did no work but had his friend use the money he gained from evil capitalism it provide for all of his family.[1]

Finally Per Capita GDP is way higher in free countries than communist countries. N. Korea has a Per Capita GDP of $1,800, while S. Korea has a Per Capita GDP of $20,400. China has a Per Capita GDP of $6,300, however America has a Per Capita GDP of $40,100. Clearly these facts prove that Communism doesn't work in any case. [2]

[1]. plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/
[2]. Cultural Geography 3rd addition

Good luck pro.
Mestari

Pro

Burden of Proof

This debate is already over. My opponent does not fulfill his burden of proof. As established in round 1, "It is on the Con to prove that communism does not do work." Remember that the definition of work is "The transfer of energy from one object to another." My opponent has failed to explain why communism does not transfer energy from one object to another. I mean... come on... he talks about per capita GDP. That is COMPLETELY irrelevant to this debate.

Violation of the Rules

My opponent claimed that "This is a debate about Communism not Capitalism. Debating anything but Communism will result in forfeit of the debate." However, he starts talking about being a yankees fan and a red sox fan. Last time I checked, baseball =/= communism... He also states "Per Capita GDP in free countries is far better than in communist's governments." Free countries =/= communism. My opponent has forfeited the debate by not talking about communism.

Pro Case

Work = The transfer of energy
Energy = The capacity to d owork by the application of force
Force = Making someone do something

Thus, if communism makes somebody do something it works, extremely hard mind you.

Exibit A: The Hollywood Blacklist [1]

The Hollywood Blacklist was only created out of fear of communism. Therefore we can conclude that if communism didn't exist, the HB would not have been created. It logically followed that communism made people fear it and thus create the HB. As communism made people do something, it did work. And hey, it seems like a unique job, and we need those in a struggling economy with high unemployment!

Con Case

My opponent affirms: "It is no secret that Russia was forcing citizens to profess atheism." Russia (Communism) forced people to profess atheism. Forcing people to do something is a sign of work. Stop hating on communism, he works harder than you do and all you do it bully him. Can't we all just get along?

Sources

1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
yoda

Con

I'm sorry that I didn't put this in the last round, but your definition of work is completely diverting the meaning of this debate. Furthermore if we use your definition, communism doesn't work. Communism is an idea, not an object that is capable of work. I will now offer my meaning of this debate.

This debate is does communism provide the most productive society and the richest economy. I thought that if you were actually going to debate you would understand what I meant and not change it for your own benefit.

My opponent keeps on referring to communism as a living human being. So I would like to clarify that we are talking about the totalitarian government known as communism.

Now to clarify the "Breakage of Rules". The reason I included the statements in controversy are 1. So that there was a comparison, and 2. So that there was an understandable comparison. These stats were included so that I could sow the short comings of communism.

Good luck Pro, and don't make a larger mess of this debate.
Mestari

Pro

My opponent has chosen to refute my definition of work. We shall reject his definition as he did not explicitly oppose the rule that I established in round 1 reference dropped arguments: "If an argument is dropped, it shall be considered to be conceded as true." Insofar as my opponent has failed to refute my definition in round 2, he has forfeited the opportunity to do so.

He also claims "This debate is does communism provide the most productive society and the richest economy." However, the resolution states "Does Communism Work?" I am not an Oxford English Scholar, but I am rather sure that work is not equivalent to "provides the most productive society and the richest economy." We are debating the resolution, not random topics my opponent thinks of in round 3.

Burden of Proof

Extend that "It is on the Con to prove that communism does not do work." He never disproves the possibility of Communism forcing the transfer of energy. Remember that I only have to disprove my opponents case, not provide evidence in support of mine (which I do anyway) to win this debate. You can vote Pro right here.

Violation of the Rules

My opponent's response in round 3 was an attempt to justify violating the rules. He argues that he talked about baseball and GDP instead of communism because he wanted a comparison. However, the rules did not state that you must only talk about communism, unless you are making a comparison. They state that you must only talk about communism and nothing else or you will lose the round. My opponent has to prove that communism does not work while only talking about communism. Baseball and GDP =/= Communism.

Pro Case

Extend Exhibit A that goes dropped in this round. Communism caused the Hollywood Blacklist to be created. Insofar as it took energy to create the HB, Communism has by proxy forced the transfer of energy.

Con Case

Extend my turn on the Con case. If Communism forced citizens to profess atheism then it forced them to use energy to talk, thus you affirm.
Debate Round No. 3
yoda

Con

yoda forfeited this round.
Mestari

Pro

Voters

1. Burden of Proof

My opponent never strictly proves that communism is incapable of working. He conceded this as his burden of proof by not refuting it the entire debate.

2. Violation of Rules

As my opponent forfeited last round, he did not refute that his round 3 response was simply an attempt to justify violating the rules without substantial grounding. The rules explicitly state you must only talk about communism. My opponent talked about GDP and Baseball. Neither of those are communist.

3. Pro Case

My opponent never refuted that communism directly caused the Hollywood Blacklist to be created. Remember that it took energy to create the HB, thus communism forced the transfer of energy by proxy.

4. Con Case

The turn on the con case goes unrefuted. If Communism forced citizens to profess atheism then it forced them to use energy to talk, thus you affirm.

Underview

Remember that you are always going to prefer my definition of work because my opponent failed to refute it in round 2. We have to adhere to the resolution provided, not arbitrary topics he makes up later in the debate. Thank you for judging, and good luck to my opponent in the voting phase.

Disclaimer

In affirming, I do not support communism. I just do not believe he is as lazy as people make him out to be and the constant gnagging about his ability to succeed in life has caused him severe mental trauma. If you negate, you should feel ashamed of yourself, it's like picking on a kid with no friends. He'll be scarred for life. If you have a heart you will vote for communism!
Debate Round No. 4
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
I am for COn, but I think he needs to step it up.
Posted by Stephen_Hawkins 5 years ago
Stephen_Hawkins
hmm... yoda wins on the hand that he showed that ideas don't do work. On the other hand, Mestari has shown yoda to violate his own rules...
Posted by yoda 5 years ago
yoda
@handsofmanos yea i agree. thats cheap. @blackvoid I wouldhave but I didn't read his debate closely enough and didn't realize where he was going with it
Posted by HandsofManos 5 years ago
HandsofManos
I guess I was taking life seriously there. I should probably go smoke.
Posted by BlackVoid 5 years ago
BlackVoid
No, because he's using it in a humorous manner. You mean you didn't lol when reading his arguments?

Plus, if Pro really wanted the debate he's looking for, he should have refuted the definitions in R2, or discussed them in the comments before arguing. As-is, he dropped the definitions in R2 completely rather than trying to negotiate and is thus partially responsible.
Posted by HandsofManos 5 years ago
HandsofManos
Anyone else get the feeling that Mestari is being a douche by using a different definition of work than what Yoda obviously meant?
Posted by BlackVoid 5 years ago
BlackVoid
"Furthermore, my opponent states that Communism will be defined by Karl Marx, but Karl has decided not to post his definition onto this debate"

Rofl. Lol at your whole round, really. This should be fun to read.
Posted by yoda 5 years ago
yoda
My bad. I didn't read it close enough. Sorry pro.
Posted by yoda 5 years ago
yoda
1st round was only acceptance. I will assume that you didn't know that though.
Posted by Mestari 5 years ago
Mestari
Oh, and the source for my definition of communism:

http://en.wikipedia.org...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by BlackVoid 5 years ago
BlackVoid
yodaMestariTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con forfeited and dropped Pro's definitions until R3, which is too late. Pro clearly wins on the definitions as the HB argument goes conceded, and Con never showed how Communism doesn't promote the transfer of energy.