The Instigator
T5seconds
Pro (for)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
travis18352
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Socialism is a morally superior economic system than Capitalism (Yes\Pro)

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...
T5seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/21/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,469 times Debate No: 46435
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (1)

 

T5seconds

Pro

This is my first debate on Debate.Org, thank you for accepting my challenge. I'm not really aware of any rules I may need? So I will just begin my argument and wait for my challenger. I GLADLY accept any tips for debate that are offered towards me. (I would prefer to keep round 1 with overarching concepts rather than specific examples) I accept the burden of proof as the one making the claim.

My opening argument: Socialism as a concept enforces the ideas of the French Revolution. These ideas of Liberty, Equality, and Camaraderie have become major influences in shaping modern views of government and economy. Capitalism, by tying the value of the person to what they are able to produce, and setting these "numbers" against each other, violate all of these tenets. Moreso, if you can find moral justification from Leviathan (By Thomas Hobbs), you find that as nothing is morally wrong with murder in order to perpetuate ones existence, then Socalisim, by offering an alternative to this "dog eat dog" world, has the moral high ground.
travis18352

Con

under socialism you have government intervention in everything. government regulates everything. all the wealth is re distributed which discourages people to work and think for themselves because you know that you will always get the money from somebody else. but under capitalism you have the freedom to start your own business and make a living for yourself. with the free market you have competition so products always get better. if there was no competition there would be no need to make your product better which is what you have under socialism
Debate Round No. 1
T5seconds

Pro

Firstly, I would like to point out that you have not attacked any of the points of Morality, which still stand. If you would like to argue about the productivity of Socialism I will gladly have that debate with you at a later time. This debate, however, is based on the morality of the two ideas. I'll be addressing what you said in the comments, but for the purpose of this debate you should stick to disproving the idea that it is not morally superior.

I will however, continue on my points. Capitalism, in it's "competition", enables there to be such inequality that classes begin to supersede each other. The point is this, if you love democracy (which I am assuming my opponent to find the most morally acceptable), you can not love capitalism, because the two are incompatible. On this I will explain. In a completely free market, those with the favorable talents will quickly rise to the top of the market. Whereas in a feudal society, it was land that gave men power, in the capitalistic, its money. The land gave the kings and lords their dominion over the serfs much like money does in capitalism. The money buys the loyalty of lobbyists to protect private interests much in the way the knight was bought with land to protect feudal interests. This disenfranchises those without the preferred talents that are not at the top, and puts them to the point where they are nothing more than serfs in a society proclaiming their freedom. So IF democracy is the most moral of government types, (Due to the EQUALITY of people in the ability to decide their fate), then Socialism is preferable to capitalism as it avoids the class problem. (And yes, there is such a thing as social democracy. Do not compare the failed Soviet States to the modern theory of Socialism. I will not stoop to replying.)
travis18352

Con

I didn't attack your points because on debate.org the first round is usually for your main points and rounds 2 and 3 or however many are for rebuttal. You said that in capitalism the people with the favorable talents rise to the top but the people without the favorable talents disenfranchises them to the point that they are just serfs. This is how it should be. Under socialism, everything is pretty much just given to you but with capitalism you have to actually work to rise to the top. Yes it is true that under a capitalistic society not everybody is equal but people are not equal.
Debate Round No. 2
T5seconds

Pro

Thank you for explaining that to me. As I've said, this is my first debate and I appreciate the help.

People may not be equal, yet many (Even conservatives) agree people are deserving some basis of living. Socalisim as a concept has been introduced into every free market in the world for the sole point that capitalism offends the moral sensibilities enough that in its undiluted form is incapable of persistence. From the New Deal in the US to English Labour Laws, no society has been untouched by socialism because of its moral impact. All of this has happened because people have an aversion to seeing inequality. The reason no society exists with serfdom today is because people hate being serfs. There won't ever be a society that is purely liberal because the disenfranchised will not permit such a society to continue. They will rebel, and when they do, there is no moral problem. When a hungry man steals food to keep himself alive, he hasn't done anything wrong. You can't condemn survival.
travis18352

Con

I understand that.
I completely agree that no country has ever been untouched by socialism but I believe that to much socialism just disenfranchises the people who do work hard.
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by T5seconds 3 years ago
T5seconds
If your going to base the entire French revolution on the Jacobin's and ignore why it was fought, why it mattered, and how it changed the world, then you aren't even trying to understand the argument I put forward and I find the idea that you can proclaim "Socialism is not liberty" without any sense of an argument in that repulsive.
Posted by Gencsta 3 years ago
Gencsta
Lmao I like how you start with the French revolution. Liberty? Socialism is not liberty. Thr French revolution was a disgusting and bloody revolution. We in thr US were capitalists and we didnt murder our own population by the tens of thousands.
Posted by T5seconds 3 years ago
T5seconds
Progress can be made without competition. The whole idea that people are completely complacent without competition is trite and has no basis.
Posted by stomp1444 3 years ago
stomp1444
Competition nurtures innovation as they need to succeed in order to survive while in a socialistic system they are funded by the government and as our own government has shown with Amtrak they have no need for competition so no need to make things better such as a better standard of living
Posted by T5seconds 3 years ago
T5seconds
On the idea that Socialism is not good for progress, I will make two points. On one, there is no reason that a cooperative society has to forgo progress. There is no magic pill in competition. An R&D team without worrying about grants and competition will surely make just as many strides as those having to compete with others. There are some people who have a sense of Civic Duty. The ideas of how to reach socialism and make it workable should be left to the realm of socialists. This is not to say you can't ask questions. Yet to proclaim "This won't work!" means nothing if you have not truly tried to make it work.
Posted by T5seconds 3 years ago
T5seconds
Communism doesn't work, Ill agree, but there are Socalist nordic countries that are some of the happiest places on earth.
Posted by stomp1444 3 years ago
stomp1444
Morally superior to a limit that everyone gets something but practically it doesnt work look at the former USSR Its economy failed
Posted by T5seconds 3 years ago
T5seconds
Thank you Travis for accepting my debate!
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Seeginomikata 3 years ago
Seeginomikata
T5secondstravis18352Tied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro argued morality well. The con was too focus on productivity/work ethic arguments, which were not the focus of the debate. Socialism is about valuing the society and its individuals, while capitalism is about production and wealth. From a moral standpoint, valuing humans over the economy wins.