The Instigator
ChrisF
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
donald.keller
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Right Wing Governments, In General, Are Less Moral Than Left Wing Governments

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 1 vote the winner is...
donald.keller
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/15/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,839 times Debate No: 45997
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (24)
Votes (1)

 

ChrisF

Pro

For the purpose of this debate, the Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc, as well as the various "Communist" countries in Asia and Latin America can be considered left-wing. While I do not personally believe they were ever really socialist at all, and just claiming to be for most of their existence. That's besides the point though.

I'm arguing that in general, right wing governments are less moral than left wing ones. Con is arguing that left wing governments are less moral.

The Rules:
1) Round 1 is for acceptance only. Rounds 2-4 are for arguments. Round 5 is for closing statements.
2) Don't try and use semantics to get an easy win, I've seen people try to.
3) Religious arguments are invalid.
4) If you came to troll, go somewhere else.

Good luck to whoever accepts!
donald.keller

Con

Accepted.
Debate Round No. 1
ChrisF

Pro

To start, I think I should probably list some of the most immoral right wing governments. Some of them, you can probably guess.
  • Nazi Germany (1933-1945): This is probably the first thing people think of when they think of immoral right wing governments, if for some reason they were thinking about that. Under Hitler's regime, an estimated 11 million people were systematically killed, and millions more were sent to forced labor camps. It is estimated that the Nazis killed roughly two thirds of all Jews living in Europe, including roughly a million children.
  • Guatemala (1954-1980s): In 1954, the democratically elected leftist government of Guatemala was overthrown in a United States supported coup. Over the next several decades, a series of military dictators controlled Guatemala. During this time, tens of thousands who opposed the Guatemalan government disappeared. In 1980, the Guatemalan army initiated "Operation Sophia," the aim of which was to prevent guerrilla warfare by destroying the civilian base they came from. Specifically, the army targeted the Maya population of Guatemala, who they believed to be supporting guerrillas. Between 1980 and 1983, the army destroyed 626 villages, killed or caused the disappearance of over 200,000 people, and displaced over a million people. [1][2]
  • South Africa (1948-1994): In addition to the United States, South Africa was a backer of the many military regimes in Guatemala. What is more well known is the Apartheid period in South Africa, from 1948-1994. During this time, the Afrikaner minority greatly limited the rights of the much larger African majority. During this time period, millions were removed from their homes, and forced to live in segregated communities. Starting in 1970, all black South Africans were officially stripped of their citizenship, and forced to become citizens of one of ten self-governing tribes. Political opposition was suppressed, any many who opposed the government, such as future president Nelson Mandela, were imprisoned. [3]
  • The United States of America (1776-1970s): Admittedly, the United States has never been very far right wing, but they are right wing none the less. As most Americans know, from 1776-1868, slavery was legal in certain parts of the United States. This slavery consisted entirely of Africans abducted from their homes in Africa, or their descendants. Slavery was eventually made illegal in all American states in 1868, after the ratification of the 13th Amendment, but racial discrimination didn't end there. From 1868 until the 1970s, many southern states had laws enforcing racial segregation, and attempted to prevent African Americans from expressing their right to vote through poll taxes, literacy tests, and outright threats. Racism continues to be a problem in the United States to this day, albeit much less of a problem.
  • European Governments and the United States (1492-Late 1800s): By European governments, I specifically mean the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Spain, and most other imperial powers in the Americas, possibly excluding France. From Columbus' arrival in the Americas in 1492 to the present day, the majority of the native people of the Americans have been killed off, by a combination of war, disease spread by European settlers (either accidentally or intentionally), and deliberate attempts at extermination. Famous examples are the Wounded Knee Massacre, where hundreds of Lakota men, women, and children were killed by American forces, and the Trail of Tears, in which roughly 17,000 Cherokee were forced to leave their homes for reservations in what is now Oklahoma. An estimated 4,000 people died on the long journey to the reservations. [4]
Seeing as my time is running out, I will end with those five examples. So for now, I'll wait for my opponent to make his case before introducing any more of my own arguments.

[1] https://www.hmh.org...
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org...
donald.keller

Con

Outline: I will argue that immorality is equally found on all wings of Government in Argument I. In Argument II, I will argue that what is consider Moral, More Moral, or Less Moral, is different from person to person. Some will consider death more immoral then life in prison, and vice versa. In Argument III, I will explain how Pro's examples aren't restricted to Right-Winged governments.

Argument I: Right-Winged Governments v Left-Winged Governments.

Pro tries to prove that Right-Wings governments are more immoral than Left-Winged governments by showing examples of how they, like any group, can be bad. However, his examples are cherry-picked and even include issues that aren't Right-Winged. Such issues including slavery, which is found in many countries, regardless of their alignment. Pro is trying to make these great evils look Right-Winged based, when they aren't.

There are also good Right-Winged governments. Some would consider the US, still Right-Winged, to be a very good nation.

Just as Fascism and Nazism are bad, so are many Left-Winged countries. The USSR, a major Communist/Socialist nation, was responsible for more war deaths in WWII than every Axis power together. Consisting of 10,000,000 soldiers killed through the use of inhumane war strategies, such as moving men over mine fields to clear paths for tanks. This is HALF of the total military death count of WWII (1). They also planned to kill 20,000,000 Jews in a holocaust of their own, before Stalin died (2). The Soviets are responsible for some of the most immoral practices in human history (3).

North Korea, also a far-leftist government, is among the worst and most immoral nations in history. Going as far as to have a 3 Generations of Punishment sentence. The punishment would involve one's whole family to be thrown in prison and kept there for 3 generations of children (4). This is only an example of the Immorality of North Korea.

Another example of a Leftist government would be the Chinese, decades back. Mao Zedong killed many people. While it is not possible to know how many died, estimates go up to 75 million, almost the ENTIRE death count of World War II. The Great Leap Forward killed a possible 45 million alone in four years (5). Without a doubt, this would be the greatest massacre of men in history.

Communist/Socialist Regimes also include Vietnam and multiple South African nations. The total death count of these nations reach as high as 100 million people outside of war (6). There isn't a doubt that, as bad as any Right-Wing nation can get, a Left-Wing nation can get just as bad, if not worse.

1) http://warchronicle.com...
2) http://globalfire.tv...
3) http://www.nybooks.com...
4) http://www.cbsnews.com...
5) http://www.independent.co.uk...
6) http://en.wikipedia.org...

Argument II: Relative Morality.

While many would consider Stalin's strategy of moving men over mine fields more moral than Hitler's gas camps, many would find Stalin's strategy more immoral. The eye of the beholder determines this. While Pro argues morality from a Leftist perspective, someone on the Right would view it from a Rightist perspective. A Fascist would see Socialism to be more immoral than what Fascists did. Many Fascists wouldn't see anythign the Fascists did to be immoral.

Which side is more immoral depends nearly entirely on which side is viewing the issue. We see that when Pro brings up the Colonials killing the Natives. Many would laugh at the idea that the Colonials were bad for killing off the Natives through disease. With the exception of a slight few, most Colonials didn't think about diseases... Where they lived, they where either immune, or could be cured. How would they know the Indians didn't have those diseases or cures to them? Remember that they didn't know a disease was a tiny organism. They thought they were evil spirits. They never once thought the Indians would be wiped out by them...

That is an example of how Pro thinks they were immoral for causing the genocide of Natives, and I don't believe they were wrong since they never expected something like that. Morality is based on who's perspective you view it from. While a Leftist would assume that Right-Wigned governments are worse, a person from the Right would believe Left-Winged governments are worse.

Argument III: The Immorality of any Government.

Claiming Right-Winged Governments are more immoral because they have slavery makes the assumption that Slavery is a Right-Winged issue. Many would assume Communism is also forged on the backs are slaves, whom we pretend are called citizens. That again returns us to Argument 2. There were, and are, many South African communist states filled with slaves and slave trading. Many Communist nations have no polls or voting, and many today have unwelcomed citizens who get pushed aside and displaced for not being of that culture.

Africa is full of almost everything Con listed off for the older United States and Europe. They aren't all Right-Winged governments. The idea that these issues are Right-Winged because you can find them in Right-Winged governments is terrible fallacious.

Conclusion: I have shown that Left-Winged governments can be just as immoral as Right-Winged governments. I have explained how every issue Con mentioned isn't restrictively Right-Winged, and how what is deemed more immoral depends on the people explaining it.
Debate Round No. 2
ChrisF

Pro

I'm a bit short on time, so my responses might be a little shorter than usual, but here goes.

1) Such issues including slavery, which is found in many countries, regardless of their alignment.

Seeing as slavery has existed for thousands of years, and the first left wing government was founded roughly 97 years ago, I think its generally safe to say that right wing governments, such as fascist dictatorships and monarchies, have been keeping slaves for longer. And even if you don't look at the length of time these countries had slaves, slavery was still more widespread in these countries, and also more widely accepted. For example, in the United States, slavery existed in the entire nation at one point, and in much of it at other points. During this time, it was viewed as very acceptable, and some people were taught to believe that it would be immoral to help escaped slaves reach freedom in Canada.

2) The USSR, a major Communist/Socialist nation, was responsible for more war deaths in WWII than every Axis power together. Consisting of 10,000,000 soldiers killed through the use of inhumane war strategies, such as moving men over mine fields to clear paths for tanks.

This point is a bit confusing to me. The source you provided showed the total of how many Soviet soldiers died, not how they were killed. Are you trying to say the Soviets killed 10 million of their own soldiers on purpose? That would mean that exactly zero soldiers were killed by the enemy. The fact that the Soviets had the highest causualties hardly makes them less moral, if anything it shows how much they did to bring about the end of the war. In fact, many believe that if it wasn't for the Soviet effort at the Battle of Stalingrad, the war could have ended much differently. I will concede, however, that Joseph Stalin was a lunatic, and it doesn't surprise me much that he planned on killing even more people. While I feel he fails to represent anything resembling a socialist or communist, I suppose his government was at least left wing in name.

3) The Soviets are responsible for some of the most immoral practices in human history.

The link you provided for this goes against your point. Allow me to take two quotes from your source:
  • "The total number of noncombatants killed by the Germans—about 11 million—is roughly what we had thought. The total number of civilians killed by the Soviets, however, is considerably less than we had believed. We know now that the Germans killed more people than the Soviets did."
  • "It turns out that, with the exception of the war years, a very large majority of people who entered the Gulag left alive."
This could say one of a few things about your source. One is that your source is legitimately telling the truth, in which case I myself am honestly surprised, having always heard that Stalin killed more people. A second is that your source is incorrect, meaning it shouldn't be used. Either way, it shows you might not have read it carefully. There is also a third possibility, that I am misunderstanding what it says.

4) North Korea, also a far-leftist government, is among the worst and most immoral nations in history.

I have to concede this point, North Korea is truly a terrible place. This however goes back to the question of whether they are truly left wing, but for the purpose of this debate, they are. However, the debate is about left wing governments in general, not specific ones.

5) While many would consider Stalin's strategy of moving men over mine fields more moral than Hitler's gas camps, many would find Stalin's strategy more immoral. The eye of the beholder determines this. While Pro argues morality from a Leftist perspective, someone on the Right would view it from a Rightist perspective.

I honestly doubt anyone would believe that killing soldiers, regardless of what side they were on, is worse than rounding up innocent men, women, and children, and killing them in gas chambers. Assuming that Stalin did use that strategy, which seems a bit questionable. Do you have a source for that I could see? As for the eye of the beholder, in many of the cases that are being discussed here, that doesn't apply. I would hope that most people would view slavery, genocide, and segregation as immoral, at least in 21st century America. As far as these atrocities are concerned, there isn't really a left or right wing perspective, unless either believes this is okay.

6) Claiming Right-Winged Governments are more immoral because they have slavery makes the assumption that Slavery is a Right-Winged issue. Many would assume Communism is also forged on the backs are slaves, whom we pretend are called citizens.

I will point out, there has never been a truly Communist nation, nor have any nations claimed to be Communist. Communism is a form of government that takes time to achieve, it doesn't happen all at once. After a Capitalist society dissolves (by the way, it can be argued that unregulated Capitalism leads to slavery), a Socialist one takes its place. All left wing nations have claimed to be Socialist, meaning that they believed they were on the road to Communism. In a Socialist society, the government is still democratic, and people are still free to run businesses, create corporations, etc. However, most left wing governments admittedly have been corrupt, leading one person or a few people to excercise near complete control over their nations. The same, however, can be said for all forms of government, at least those that have been used.
donald.keller

Con

My apologies. It will never take that long to reply again.

-------------

Rebuttal I: Right Winged Governments V Left-Winged Governments

This is a fallacious statement, assuming that because Left-Winged governments didn't appear until 97 years ago, that these are Right-Winged issues. 1) They were cultural issues, not Government-based at all. The fact the Left-Wing governments can also have slavery tells us that. This doesn't mean that slavery is a Right-Winged thing, just that they were there longer. If it'd had been Left-Winged governments there, they would have had it first. And 2) Right-Winged governments, like Fascism, is rather new as well. These issues are mostly cultural. Remember that if we assume Far-Right governments exist long before, we must accept that it was Far-Right Governments that ended slavery. Pro's argument is more a false generalization.

The USSR's death rate was related very much to Stalin's war tactics, albeit the source is a book I can't locate. The Far-Left USSR's cruel tactics lead to many of their war deaths. As for the claim, "The Soviets are responsible for some of the most immoral practices in human history", I didn't link that to a source. Pro is associating one claim to another entirely unrelated claim's source. That source was related to the war, while my claim was related to every non-war claim I made, like "They also planned to kill 20,000,000 Jews in a holocaust of their own, before Stalin died." Another example of Stalin's cruelty was the Katyn massacre, with 22,000 victims in one day. The only reason the USSR didn't kill the same number of people as the Germans was because of the time spent invading. Russian only spent one year in Germany's land before the war ended.

Pro questions if North Korea is left-winged. North Korea is one of 5 remaining Communist States remaining (1). By conceding to this point, we've established that Left-Wings can be just as bad as, if not worse than, Right-Winged Government.

1) http://geography.about.com...

Rebuttal II: Relative Morality

I will inlude both Argument II and Argument III's rebuttal here. Because Pro dropped everything but 2 statements from those 2 arguments, rebuttals for each won't be long enough to warrent two seperate sections. Pro make assumptions about how people may see Morality. The German's believed Russia was more immoral for what they had done. Even today, there are many Anti-Semitic people who would find Stalin's actions more immoral than Hilter killing millions of jews.

Pro has reverted to Semantics in his last argument. Just because, say, the USSR wasn't a 'true' communism doesn't mean it isn't Far-Left. True Communism or semi-Communism are both Far-Left. Even then, the USA isn't a true Democracy, but you wouldn't be entirely wrong to call them a Democracy. Every nation I mentioned were still Far-Left, and have done things equally as bad as any Far-Right government.

Argument I: Political Terrorism.

Far-Left revolutionary armies have been infamously known for their application of Terrorism. It's easily claimed that the policies of the government can been seen in the policies of the group fighting to establish that government. In the US, 24% of all terrorism is committed by Far-Left groups, and another 5% by Communist groups. This equal 29% of all terrorist attacks in the US being caused in the name of Far-Left governments (2).

2) http://www.washingtonsblog.com...

Conclusion: Pro has attacked only a few of my claims, completely dropping almost every one of my arguments. This includes my argument about Far-Left China and Russia killing 100,000,000 people, and dropping almost the entire bulk of my Argument II.

Far-Left Governments have the ability to be just as bad as any Far-Right Government.
Debate Round No. 3
ChrisF

Pro

1) Right-Winged governments, like Fascism, is rather new as well. These issues are mostly cultural. Remember that if we assume Far-Right governments exist long before, we must accept that it was Far-Right Governments that ended slavery.

As for American slavery, I can agree with you, but millions were forced to work in labor camps in Nazi Germany as slaves. Seeing as Nazism is a relatively new ideology, compared to others, this is still more common in right wing governments, mainly very far-right ones.

2) As for the claim, "The Soviets are responsible for some of the most immoral practices in human history", I didn't link that to a source. Pro is associating one claim to another entirely unrelated claim's source.

Well, seeing as your sentence was written like this: "The Soviets are responsible for some of the most immoral practices in human history (3).", it's logical to assume that the (3), which was the label for that particular website, was related to that claim, especially since there was another source at the end of the previous sentence.

3) Pro questions if North Korea is left-winged. North Korea is one of 5 remaining Communist States remaining (1). By conceding to this point, we've established that Left-Wings can be just as bad as, if not worse than, Right-Winged Government.

Although I personally questioned it, at the beginning of the debate I conceded that it was. In my personal opinion, North Korea, although calling itself socialist, is not truly socialist, nor is it truly a "Democratic People's Republic". However, I specified that for the purpose of this debate, it is left wing. By conceding this, I have indeed established that left-wing governments are able to be as bad. But the debate is whether they are worse in general, which one example does not prove.

4) The German's believed Russia was more immoral for what they had done. Even today, there are many Anti-Semitic people who would find Stalin's actions more immoral than Hilter killing millions of jews.

If you're referring to Nazi Germany, then how did they see the Soviets as immoral? From the late 1930s to 1941, the Soviets and Nazis were allies in their joint invasion of Poland. And generally today, people view genocide as
the most, if not one of the most, immoral things a person can do. Again, in general.

5) Far-Left revolutionary armies have been infamously known for their application of Terrorism. It's easily claimed that the policies of the government can been seen in the policies of the group fighting to establish that government. In the US, 24% of all terrorism is committed by Far-Left groups, and another 5% by Communist groups. This equal 29% of all terrorist attacks in the US being caused in the name of Far-Left governments (2).

Far-right groups, although not necessarily as famous, have done their fair share of terrorism and immoral actions. For example, the thousands of people that have been lynched in the last hundred years by the Ku Klux Klan, and the Contra rebels in Communist Nicaragua, who targeted hospitals and healthcare workers, as well as killing and torturing civilians, raping women, and attacking civilian homes indiscriminately. [1]

6) Pro has attacked only a few of my claims, completely dropping almost every one of my arguments. This includes my argument about Far-Left China and Russia killing 100,000,000 people, and dropping almost the entire bulk of my Argument II.

This is just not true, I have certainly attacked the majority of your claims, and certainly commented on the Soviet Union, quite a bit actually. Admittedly, I never specifically attacked your claims about China, but then you also never attacked mine about Guatemala or South Africa. I'd also like to add, the majority of left-wing dictatorships have come to power after a right-wing one was overthrown. In many times, it was truly better afterwords, or at the very least, the lesser of two evils.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
donald.keller

Con

Argument I: Right-Winged Governments v Left-Winged Governments.

Pro is still saying that because Nazi Germany had slaves, that Slave is a Right-Winged-only issue. No, North Korea even has slaves (the people in the 3 Generations of Punishment). One would argue that everyone in the USSR and China a decade or two back were slaves. Most countries have had slavery in their time. The fact that Slavery mostly ended before the concept of Left and Right Governments came into creation is why you won't see many examples.

Pro's argument is false cause and Correlation, assuming that because some bad examples of Right-Winged Governments had slavery, it was a Right-Wing thing. Every type pf Government is capable of slavery. Nazi Germany being an example. After doing some research, I came to remember something the the Nazis. The word Nazi means Nationalsozialismus, or National Socialism (1). Nazism, is a Left-Winged to Central-Winged government, explaining the hatred Hitler had for Far-Right winged Fascism. Nazism is a form of Socialism (2).

Now that I see which source Pro was connecting to the prior quote, I can reply better. Pro is misreading the purpose of the source. I didn't use it to compare Hitler and Stalin, as he assumes. I used it to show the crimes Stalin committed. The mention of Hitler was only side information not relevant to the conversation. Hitler may have killed more, but that doesn't mean Stalin is suddenly a better person/

Pro still never addressed my argument about Far-Left groups being responsible for 100 million deaths between China and Russia alone.

1) http://en.wikipedia.org...
2) http://www.americannaziparty.com...

Argument II: Relative Morality.

North Korea and Nazi Germany is a sign that Left-Winged governments can be worse. Pro conceded that Left-Winged governments can be equal, of course from his perspective. Which is more immoral depends on the reader. A modern day fascist would still consider Left-Wings governments as more immoral. There isn't reason to assume, objectively, that one is worse than the other.

Just because the Nazi's were allied with the Soviet doesn't mean they liked each other. Hitler and Stalin hated each other (3). Remember that Hitler invaded Stalin, and had been planning to long before becoming allies. As for what people consider the worst thing human's could do, many would consider rape more immoral than Genocide.

3) http://alphahistory.com...

Rebuttal III: The Immorality of any Government.

The KKK is indeed a terrorist group... I never denied that the Right has Terrorists as well, but it doesn't fix the issue my Argument causes for Pro... Far-Left groups are responsible for the second largest percent of terrorist attacks, behind Latinos. Far-Right groups do not even show up on the scale (4) In general, Left-Wing groups are more likely to commit terror.

I did comment on South Africa or Guatemala: "Pro tries to prove that Right-Wings governments are more immoral than Left-Winged governments by showing examples of how they, like any group, can be bad. However, his examples are cherry-picked and even include issues that aren't Right-Winged." I commented on them all as a group. Pro tackled Russia, but not every part of my argument regarding them. He still never attacked the 100 million people claim.

Pro brings up that Left-Winged governments tended to overtake Right-Winged governments. This doesn't prove it's better, in fact, Fascism overtook Italy's prior government, was it the better of two evils? History shows that these nations were not better off after being took over, including China, Russia, and Cuba, as well as North Korea and Vietnam. Russia and China is only doing better because of their continous adaption of Free-Market Capitalism, a Right-Winged philosphy. Most Left-Winged governments have since been overthrown.

4) http://www.loonwatch.com...

Conclusion: Left-Winged governments can be just as bad as Right-Winged governments. Which ever one is, in general, worse, depends entirely on the beholder.
Debate Round No. 4
ChrisF

Pro

I know this round isn't the place for rebuttals, but I have one thing I need to say about a point my opponent made.

1) After doing some research, I came to remember something the the Nazis. The word Nazi means Nationalsozialismus, or National Socialism (1). Nazism, is a Left-Winged to Central-Winged government, explaining the hatred Hitler had for Far-Right winged Fascism. Nazism is a form of Socialism (2).

Any socialist would cringe to hear this. Nazism isn't remotely similar to any form of socialism. In Nazi Germany, there was no universal welfare, there was no government provided anything. And the idea that Hitler hated fascism is completely ridiculous. Explain, if you will, his alliance with fascist Italy and Japan? Why did he help overthrow the left-wing government of Spain, to establish Franco's fascist regime? Can you explain the numerous fascist puppet governments set up by the Nazis throughout Europe? I mean no offense to you, but this entire claim is utterly ridiculous in every way, and I'm sad I even need to point any of this out. The rumor that Nazism is a form of socialism is just propaganda spread by the right wing to make socialists look bad. Call out Stalin all you want, but stay factual.

Now, back to my closing statements.

Throughout this debate, I have given examples of the evils of right wing governments, both in modern times and the past. As my opponent says, these evils are not exclusive to right wing governments, but attrocities were committed more often throughout history, or even throughout the last hundred years, by right wing ideologies such as fascism, Nazism, and other dictatorships, as well as more moderate right wing democracies and monarchies. Examples such as the Holocaust, the Mayan Genocide in Guatemala, Apartheid in South Africa, the Rape of Nanking by Japanese soldiers, and slavery throughout the world cannot be ignored.

Have left wing governments done immoral things? Of course, what government hasn't? But that isn't the purpose of this debate. The topic is that right wing governments, in general, are less moral. As my opponent pointed out frequently, morality can be relative, but by generally accepted standards, certain things are truly immoral.

Thanks to donald.keller for debating this topic with me, and good luck with future debates!
donald.keller

Con

I thank my opponent for this debate. It was fun.

Conclusion: As the debate has shown, both Right-Winged and Left-Winged governments are able to be equally less moral than the other, but which one is least moral depends on who is watching. Some would consider the 3 Generations of Punishment to be less moral than Gas Camps.
Debate Round No. 5
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
This leaves cons strongest contention standing in which pro danced around the entire match. That morality can be relative and how to define morality. This was Cons strongest premise and pro just failed to address it adequately enough to give him the win.

With cons contention about relative morality and what is or is not moral being a matter of perception still standing, there is virtually no way for pro to win this. If pro could have at least brought up some point that murdering is wrong across the board, or just some stance from objective morality he could have managed to win

He had more examples than Con and with more evidence, but without the ability to show that these are immoral his examples fall to pieces. His failure to address that morality is relative leaves the fact that everything he presented could be moral in a different persons eyes

Due to his failure to address objective morality or at least try and refute that morality is relative. This is a pretty clear wear for con.
Posted by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
This was a hard stance from pro to defend from the start. The first thing i want to note is that weighing whom is more moral by specific examples is almost impossible, so to me this first contention by pro is null. it is similar to saying religion is more beneficial to mankind than harmful. You can cite specific examples from either side and at that point it is all about the perception of whom is reading the debate. For that reason I am going to rule this point it. There is no way to judges this b specific examples, or at least in this debate there was not. Pro provided cases, as did con. This left me in even ground as to whom won this point. The issue from pro was that this was his only contention. He would have to show that his examples are worse than cons.

The issue with doing this is that he would have to define what moral is. Con plays this smart. He provides examples of where ring winger governments are considered to be moral and then in the next contention shows that morality can be relative. He then finishes up with every government can and will be corrupt at some point which was a solid ending to his presentation.

Now for where pro loses the debate

In his rebuttals he says

"I have to concede this point, North Korea is truly a terrible place. This however goes back to the question of whether they are truly left wing, but for the purpose of this debate, they are. However, the debate is about left wing governments in general, not specific ones."

At this point he tries and fails to show that north Korea is not left wing. He fails to do this. At this point it is accepting that both governments can be equally as bad and his only contention is null. Con does not win this in my opinion either because he just managed to shoot down the contention, but to me he did not show that right wings are more moral than left wings. Granted that was not cons angle. His angle as to show that all governments can be immoral.

At this point the debate is over
Posted by ChrisF 3 years ago
ChrisF
I just read a little of it, but not much. Good luck :)
Posted by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
A Debate: Islam is a Religion of Terror.
Posted by ChrisF 3 years ago
ChrisF
No problem, life gets in the way sometimes. Usually I'm the one making people wait too long :)

Just curious, but how were you defending Islam?
Posted by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
I'm back. Was busy defending Islam, and getting a lot of weird looks for it. People don't expect a Christian to do that.

Sorry it took so long, I can promise I won't make you wait 3 days again.
Posted by bubbatheclown 3 years ago
bubbatheclown
To all DDO Users: I have created a 2020 Mock Presidential Election, located in the Debate.Org forum. If you wish to participate as a candidate, sign up. If you do not wish to participate, feel free to watch and vote anyway.
Posted by Actionsspeak 3 years ago
Actionsspeak
I find it strange reading about how political extremes start out with messages of hope and future success, and always end in destroyed nation. The middle just tends to fade out due to lack of action (possibly where America is heading) hard to find the right balance isn't it?
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
Wylted
The reason I am trying to clarify left and right is because I want to accept the debate seeing as how I'm right wing. I just wanted to define right wing as for economic freedom and left wing as against economic freedom. I've been doing several google searches it seems definitions of left and right wing vary widely and are hard to pin down.
Posted by ChrisF 3 years ago
ChrisF
Well, that site also mentions that fascism is extremely right-wing, so it kind of helps my point.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Mikal 3 years ago
Mikal
ChrisFdonald.kellerTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments