The Instigator
socialpinko
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Neuhaus1994
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

The Marxist theory of natural State disintegration is false

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: 7/21/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,574 times Debate No: 24806
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

socialpinko

Pro

===Definitions===


The "Marxist theory of natural State disintegration" may be aptly summarized by Marx and Engels themselves from the Manifesto of the Communist Party:


Political power [the State], properly so called, is merely the organised power of one class for oppressing another. If the proletariat in its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by force of circumstances, to organise itself as a class, if, by means of a revolution it makes itself the ruling class, and, as such, sweeps away the old conditions of production by force, then it will, along with these conditions, have swept away the conditions for the existence of class antagonisms and of class generally and will thereby have abolished its own supremacy as a class.[1]


The clear implications of this point is that since the State is only existent as an institution for one class to oppress another, if the proletarian were to destroy the bourgeois as a class, then there would be no reason for the State to exist and it would naturally wither away (ushering in stateless communism). The Pro will argue against this position while the Con will defend it against Pro's criticisms.


===Rules===


1. Drops will count as concessions.

2. Semantic or abusive arguments will not be counted.

3. New arguments brought in the last round will not be counted.

4. R1 is for acceptance. Argumentation begins in R2.

5. Primary BoP is on Pro.


===Sources===


[1] Karl Marx & Friedrich Engels. Manifesto of the Communist Party. Ch. 2, Proletarians and Communists. Available online at: (http://www.marxists.org...)
Neuhaus1994

Con

I accept your challenge.
Debate Round No. 1
socialpinko

Pro

socialpinko forfeited this round.
Neuhaus1994

Con

Unfortunately pro was unable to start off the debate but I will continue regardless.

It is true that the control of the state over the classes keeps classes in existence. Therefore when classes are destroyed the natural conclusion is that the state will be destroyed by its unnecessary role. Also one must concede that so long as there are classes there will be class antagonism, and so one can also conclude that such organizations of society (means of production) must then be unstable. One then must assume that since classless societies (communism) having no such class antagonisms must therefore be inherently more stable. Being that things in nature and society move from a state of instability to a state of stability it must then be assumed that the society that lacks instability will come into existence over a period of time. For example the Soviet Union came into existence as the first socialist state, but it still retained a system of classes. The old expropriators were simply replaced. That government was ultimately to collapse, just as all attempts at enforcing class restrictions upon the people of the world. In conclusion the state cannot survive the stresses of class antagonism simply because it is inherently unstable, and thus by simple reasoning will be replaced by the more stable classless society.
Debate Round No. 2
socialpinko

Pro

socialpinko forfeited this round.
Neuhaus1994

Con

Pro again forfeited this round, so I will too voluntarily forfeit this round.
Debate Round No. 3
socialpinko

Pro

socialpinko forfeited this round.
Neuhaus1994

Con

As per the rules, pro has surrendered this debate to me, by forfeiting.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by mark.marrocco 4 years ago
mark.marrocco
I think I understand your position, but I think I agree with you, socialpinko. This does seem interesting though. I think they (Marx & Engels) were right about the problem, but not the solution.
Posted by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
Empirical analysis regarding the outcomes of various Communist experiments isn't going to be my argument. This tenet of Marxism is analytically refutable.
Posted by brian_eggleston 4 years ago
brian_eggleston
I'd happily accept this if I did not have to accept you mis-interpretation of The Communist Manifesto. You must remember that Marx and Engels could have no way of knowing that their political doctrines would be distorted and abused by future leaders such as Stalin, Kim Il-Sung and others to prop up their own corrupt dictatorships.

Let's not forget that many vile and evil leaders have distorted religious teachings in a similar way in the past. Saddam Hussein did, Col. Qaddafi did and, even today, the Israeli Government uses the "teachings" of the Torah as an excuse to persecute Arabs and to justify Jewish expansion into Arab lands.

Of course, we now know that communism was not an unmitigated success, but had Marx and Engels doctrines been followed more faithfully then the outcome may have been very different.
Posted by socialpinko 4 years ago
socialpinko
What false dichotomy?
Posted by Ore_Ele 4 years ago
Ore_Ele
oh wait, that is probably your argument.
Posted by Ore_Ele 4 years ago
Ore_Ele
Is the debate assuming the false dichotomy that Marx presents?
No votes have been placed for this debate.