The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Left-wing politics tends to be more humane than right-wing politics

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/9/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,272 times Debate No: 34628
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)




Round 1: Acceptance
Round 2: Opening Arguments
Round 3:
Round 4:
Further rebuttals and conclusion

I will argue that left-thinking politics are both historically and ideologically more beneficial, humane and fair than right-wing politics. I envite my opponent to use a range of sources and evidence to counter me in later rounds.


I accept the position of con in the argument that Left-wing politics tends to be more humane than right-wing politics. I shall argue the economically beneficial effects of Conservatism have on finding the best welfare for anyone, a job and the penalties that left-wing policies have on the people at large. I invite my opponent to counter my arguments in the latter parts of this debate.
Debate Round No. 1


I have arranged my main points in favour of my case:

Left in History
Pardon the Pun :p

The terms 'left-wing' and 'right-wing' come from the French revolution. (Fun fact: the people against the monarchy sat on the left in parliament while the monarchists sat on the right which is how they got their name.) As you probably know, the revolution happened because the elite consumed far too much and the proletariat had very little and were oppressed. People who wanted the proletariat to have basic rights were known as 'left-wingers.' As we know by societies morals today, these people were doing the right thing: by overthrowing the monarchy, the oppressed could have rights, lift out of poverty, and democracy would have a chance to be installed.

Since then, the term 'left' was used to describe people who are interested in rights and social justice. People who fought against things like slavery, racism (or bigotism of any kind for that matter) were known as the left. Indeed, the Suffragettes, who were widely looked down upon as 'leftists' are considered heroes in hindsight with today's moral standards.

Unfortunately, extremists like the Soviets distorted people's ideas of what a 'leftist' is. I'd like to take this opportunity to remind you that what the USSR did was not even true Communism and people like Marx would have disapproved of it.

Socially Liberal and Conservative

Linking on from my previous point, the left care more about people's rights. Conservatives tend to not want change for irrational reasons, be it dogma or tradition. The common definition of a liberal is someone who want people's rights to be acknowledged, even if things change and go through social instability. Meanwhile, a common definition of a conservative is someone who wants order and stability, even at the cost of people's rights.


Not only is welfare humane, but we can see from a number of countries (including my own, the UK, where the welfare state has been around for almost a century) that it works. It is in welfare states that health, education, housing and social standards are highest. Welfare protects a worker's rights because unions are allowed and given a fair amount of power. It is worth noting that countries like Norway and Sweden, which have powerful trade unions, have incredibly successful economies and high standards of living. Furthermore, nationalised healthcare means that people will receive the same good quality of treatment regardless of how much money they own. Things like housing, food and healthcare are considered to be rights.

Not having a welfare state discriminates against the poor.

Capitalism and Socialism

Freedom and autonomy, equality, justice, rights, and democracy are seen as the morally humane things to have in a society. Kai Nielsen explains, from looking at "pure socialism" and "pure capitalism," that a socialist system more humane is much more likely to exemplify these basic moral values than a capitalist system.

Most socialist are democratic socialists. They acknowledge that, while making people more equal, their rights and freedom should not be infringed. Considering that no country has ever been socialist in its pure form, it is hard to find actual hard evidence of this.

Capitalism is an economic and social model whose fundamental values are based on profit, private ownership over the means of production, competition, greed, selfishness and economic growth. This leads to the exploitation of people and the pillaging of resources. The majority don't benefit from this while the majority do. Capitalism is becoming a global system. How many people have profited and are really profiting from this system? According to the World Bank, half of the world’s population lives in poverty. Capitalism creates inequality. While some people have too much food to consume, 20,000 people starve to death everyday. The current situation is inhumane and intolerable. Billions of human beings are deprived of their fundamental rights. They are deprived access to drinking water, sufficient amounts of food and decent housing. They are deprived of access to healthcare and education. The capitalist system has therefore not succeeded in improving the lives of people. It has not been successful in resolving the great scourges of humanity. One can safely say that capitalism neglects the majority to feed the minority. This is wrong because the needs of the many outway the needs of the few.

Psychology of Politics

Studdies show that liberals are more likely to welcome new ideas, like variety, diversity and are generally more open. This openess allows people to be more accepting of things which are different to them. Conservative values tend not to want change; this fear of change could supress others. For example, the status quo of not changing marriage so gays can marry aswell would supress gay people. This might be a minor point but I thought that it would still be relevant.


RJ1998 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


Due to Con not being able to complete the debate, I plan the start a new one on the same topic. So long and be sure to check that one out.


RJ1998 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3


JohnnyC forfeited this round.


RJ1998 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by RJ1998 5 years ago
I am very sorry JohnnyC, I will not be able to complete this debate. My work schedule has been very chaotic and I have not had any free time to complete this. I apologize for wasting your time on this.
Posted by JohnnyC 5 years ago
I'm talking about a universal definition of left and right. I realise that they're not so clear cut. I wanted the two to be very broad to encompass many various ideologies of them. For example, left could include anything from social equality to welfare to even Soviet-style communism. In the debate, American left-right should be included as well as global/historical left-right.

I apologise; I should have stated this in Round 1.
Posted by ConservativePolitico 5 years ago
Yeah, are we using American right-left or global/historical right-left?
Posted by YYW 5 years ago
How are we measuring "humanity" and what are we calling "left wing" v. "right wing"? Are you talking about the modern American left v. the modern American right? Are you talking about the historical left from the French to the Bolshevik revolution v. the historical right from monarchy to neoconservatism? The topic is vague, and that is problematic...
Posted by Magic8000 5 years ago
I see you're debating in favor of a liberal topic on DDO

I too like to live dangerously.
Posted by Legitdebater 5 years ago
Are you kidding me? Benito Mussolini was the nicest dictator ever!
No votes have been placed for this debate.