The Instigator
inaudita
Pro (for)
Losing
4 Points
The Contender
Mray56
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

The idea of stalinism is the basis of a good society.

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 3 votes the winner is...
Mray56
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/29/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 789 times Debate No: 58340
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (9)
Votes (3)

 

inaudita

Pro

Round one is acceptance and definitions. I would also like to state that I'm am not promoting Stalinism in its previous form but a slightly changed version of Stalinism, similar to the society of 1984.
Mray56

Con

I accept.

Stalinism is the development of socialism while in turn, creating a communist society. Stalin associated himself as a totalitarian dictator and of whom established a party that was dominated by intellectuals and rhetoricians.

My argument will consists of debunking Stalinism and the socialistic theory, portraying failed socialist societies. My opponent will need to clarify what it means exactly to have a "changed version" of Stalinism.

http://www.britannica.com...

http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
inaudita

Pro

I state the the improved form of stalinism would be one in which in fact productivity and happiness would thrive. This would be due to childhood conditioning, much like that seen in the novel Brave New World. This would eradicate the human problem found in previous socialistic countries, and that si the ability of the individual to want to advance in his/her society. The eradication of this would provide all in their positions with contentment and happiness and allow a fully socialistic country to function. The crushing of the idea of rebellion in the individual would in fact prevent him from rebelling and prevent him from feeling the need to rebel as a person.
Mray56

Con

Thanks to my opponent for the argument.

Introduction

Stalinism was a terrible form of society. Stalin based his ideology and policies on centralization, totalitarianism, and the pursuit of communism. Stalin was a brutal form of dictator and imposed his beliefs on his people and whoever opposed him or his beliefs would be tortured or killed. This is not a basis for a good society. Stalin, in my opinion, was worse than Hitler. People were not free they were restricted through Stalin’s bureaucracy. My arguments will consist of explaining why Stalinism is not a basis for a good society and why socialism has failed.

Stalin’s 30-year rule as dictator featured thousands of atrocities, purges, expulsions, forced displacements, imprisonment in labor camps, manufactured famines, torture, acts of mass murder and massacres. The people of Russia were afraid of Stalin and his brutal ideology. Stalin had a secret police and killed anyone who was a threat to his power. People did not have a freedom of speech or the freedom to do anything for that matter because they were fearful that they would be tortured or killed.

The basis of a good society can consists of these things justice, equity, freedom, rule of law, economic opportunity, reciprocity, prosperity, critical thinking, ethical standards, concern for good citizenship, right to defense, right to private property, liberty etc. Where do you see these in Stalinism?

Stalin pushed for industrialization and collectivization, which resulted in USSR becoming an industrial power. Stalin’s economic changes coincided with millions of people imprisoned and deported to more remote locations. The sudden change in agriculture disrupted food production and resulted in the 1932-1933 Soviet famine.

Why socialism/command economy is a failure.

Socialism has failed many times in the past. Socialism lost the cold war and the fall of the USSR. At the same time Vietnams socialism failed. China’s economy began to fall until they passed a new law that would allow entrepreneurship, their economy is now thriving under capitalist reforms. North Korea, people are starving in the streets, virtually no healthcare, high unemployment rates.

Socialism is the distribution of wealth. This allows the disincentive to work and do a good job. Under capitalism people have to work for their money, simply if they don’t do a good job they will be fired. Entrepreneurship requires a great deal of work and passion to create the best possible good or service so people will purchase their products. Socialism consist of no competition between companies which means workers will not have to work as hard. Under socialism people are forced to buy/sell from the government. In free capitalistic nations people are free to buy what they want. This leaves the incentive for corporate owners to produce quality goods and services so people will buy. Same concept goes for healthcare. There is not one socialistic nation with quality healthcare, which is not the basis for a good society.

There can really be no worse economy to merge into Stalin’s Ideology. Stalin ran on the principles of a command economy (socialism). Under Stalin and his command economy, only 6% of household had more than one room. Peoples living conditions were extremely poor. Under his socialistic society healthcare was expanded but people were not treated well because the doctors were so afraid of wrongdoing. Doctors had to go by the rule book.

You’re going to have to go into more detail about the child conditioning. Ive never seen “Brave New World”. If by child conditioning you mean like brainwashing then I would absolutely disagree. You can’t brainwash people into being happy. You can’t brainwash people to believe that a form of Stalinism is a good regime. “The crushing of the idea of rebellion in the individual would in fact prevent him from rebelling and prevent him from feeling the need to rebel as a person.” This would in fact, create more of an incentive to rebel. If a dictator is that persistent into trying to get someone to not rebel then that dictator wouldn’t care into that persons well-being.

Any dictator who tortures and kills his own people certainly don't have an value in life. A country should be ran by the people not a ruthless regime. Freedom is true happiness and a basis for a good society.


http://www.ibtimes.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
https://www.msu.edu...

Debate Round No. 2
inaudita

Pro

Rebuttal
The individual based his arguments far from the society I described. The societies he describes lack the massive amount of so called "brain-washing" at birth required to make them loyal enough and willing enough to accept the position of totalitarian socialism in their life.
I do not represent a communist ideal, which you seem to represent, but a much more properly called totalitarian socialism, as it does not in fact promote happiness, and as we can easily see by the definition of communism "a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.,"[1] Stalin in fact did not practice it nor did he get involved in " ...the pursuit of communism." He only used communism as a word to attract the peasants so he could rule over them.
Conditioning
When the babies are born and growing up, conditioning is applied. They are conditioned to like or dislikes things through pain, an example of such is that, the individuals would shock babies with painful electric shocks when they are around flowers, so they will hate nature. This has to be applied more times than once before the babies will truly hate nature. Children would be then subjected to sleep-learning . Such things would then be said during their sleep as, "Alpha children wear grey. They work much harder than we do, because they're so frightfully clever. I'm really awfully glad I'm a Beta, because I don't work so hard.And then we are much better than the Gammas and Deltas. Gammas are stupid. They all wear green, and Delta children wear khaki. Oh no, I don't want to play with Delta children. And Epsilons are still worse"" Till at last the child's mind is these suggestions, and the sum of the suggestions is the child's mind. And not the child's mind only. The adult's mind too-all his life long. The mind that judges and desires and decides-made up of these suggestions. But all these suggestions are the governments suggestions This in fact, despite what you think, would make a very happy individual later in life, even though he may be ignorant.. His morals may not be the same as our own and this society may seem to you immoral, but this matters not. The society would be stable and happy, and much more so than any democratic or communistic government (if their has ever truly been one) could ever hope to be.
[1]http://en.wikipedia.org...
Mray56

Con


My argument consists of happiness and how it is the only factor to a good society, as I have already stated.


“The individual based his arguments far from the society I described.”


Your only solution for a basis of a good society is through child conditioning? You can’t condition a child to be happy for the rest of their lives. Happiness is different for many people. To neurologists, happiness is the experience of a flood of hormones released in the brain as a reward for behavior that prolongs survival. You can’t teach happiness to any individual. Brainwashing can only be achieved by making a young child believe a certain way. Of course, you can’t “believe” in happiness. Brainwashing doesn’t work as well as you think. Your way of brainwashing a child to become loyal can possibly be successful but not 100% successful. You can see this in the North Korean regime today.


North Korea has isolated their people to a point where it’s hard to tell what goes on in this country. But we have enough to have an idea of what regime is being put forth by their leadership. North Koreans operate under a command economy with no individual freedom or liberty. They are brainwashed at birth to believe Kim Jung Un is a God. His face is plastered everywhere, books, all TV channels, every household must have a picture of him hanging up or they will receive jail time. Now we do know for a fact that there have been hundreds of thousands of people who have oppressed that government, even with the child conditioning tactics. Of course, these people are sent to death camps where they will be tortured then soon killed. This is not a stable and happy society.


Your version of child conditioning is to eradicate them through pain? “Individuals would shock babies with painful electric shocks when they are around flowers, so they will hate nature. “ I’m sorry but this is just sick. This can’t be a good/health society when you are physically torturing babies to adapt to the vision of a dictator. Studies have shown that physically abusing a child will result to an unstable mentality later in that person’s life. These are the people who conduct these mass shootings/killings etc, because of the built up anger and emotions they have inside of them.



“I do not represent a communist ideal, which you seem to represent, but a much more properly called totalitarian socialism”


Well communism and socialism is the same thing in terms of economic policies. A totalitarian socialism is the worst form of government control of its people.



My opponent has configured a society that has never been practiced before. There is probably a reason why. Child conditioning to form a society to a certain rule has only been a theory. Never before has it been done successfully to where the government and the society is stable. My argument is that practicing this technique will result to a wide form of rebellion. My opponent believes that child conditioning will make the persona ignorant when my position states clearly that people are smart and not dumb, as we see in North Korea today. Brainwashing doesn’t work for the vast majority of people.



Debate Round No. 3
inaudita

Pro

"Your only solution for a basis of a good society is through child conditioning? You can’t condition a child to be happy for the rest of their lives. Happiness is different for many people. To neurologists, happiness is the experience of a flood of hormones released in the brain as a reward for behavior that prolongs survival. You can’t teach happiness to any individual. Brainwashing can only be achieved by making a young child believe a certain way. Of course, you can’t “believe” in happiness. Brainwashing doesn’t work as well as you think. Your way of brainwashing a child to become loyal can possibly be successful but not 100% successful. You can see this in the North Korean regime today."
Happiness cannot be taught but people can be taught what causes happiness. This is very much seen in the book Brave New World, where the individuals are put in a stable condition in which what they were taught to be happy with is consistently reinforced. Whenever they cannot be happy they intake drugs to maintain that happiness. This produces a completely happy world, even though individuals may not be taught to be happy under all situations are allowed to be happy even when they don't meet the conditions.

"North Korea has isolated their people to a point where it’s hard to tell what goes on in this country. But we have enough to have an idea of what regime is being put forth by their leadership. North Koreans operate under a command economy with no individual freedom or liberty. They are brainwashed at birth to believe Kim Jung Un is a God. His face is plastered everywhere, books, all TV channels, every household must have a picture of him hanging up or they will receive jail time. Now we do know for a fact that there have been hundreds of thousands of people who have oppressed that government, even with the child conditioning tactics. Of course, these people are sent to death camps where they will be tortured then soon killed. This is not a stable and happy society."
It is not currently a stable and happy society, but given time natural selection will take place and those that are left alive will be the submissive and happy individuals, because happiness goes with submission.

"Your version of child conditioning is to eradicate them through pain? “Individuals would shock babies with painful electric shocks when they are around flowers, so they will hate nature. “ I’m sorry but this is just sick. This can’t be a good/health society when you are physically torturing babies to adapt to the vision of a dictator. Studies have shown that physically abusing a child will result to an unstable mentality later in that person’s life. These are the people who conduct these mass shootings/killings etc, because of the built up anger and emotions they have inside of them."
The conditioning isn't that entitely simple. It is more complicated than that, but that is a simple example of a method used in the brainwashing process.
Mray56

Con

Your arguing that brainwashing is feasible in producing a stable and happy society. This has never been practiced successfuly. Ive never seen "the brave new world" so please stop using that as your source.

North kroea is as close of an example of why brainwashing doesn't work. Not only is the society unstable but thousands of people have already tried to rebel against their government. This resulted them being locked in a death camp for the rest of their lives and their entire familys. North Korean people are not dumb, im almost positive that they have oppresive thoughts about their government but the north korean regime keeps fear in the peoples eyes, causing people to refrain from rebelling.

Your basing you argument off of personal opinion without any facts or statistics. Your only source is the"brave new world" which i have never seen.
Debate Round No. 4
inaudita

Pro

To say that the society wouldn't work because it has not been tested is ignorant. No society has yet attempted the brainwashing I have suggested, and that is because a lack of will and an overabundance of morals. If tested it would be a success most likely.
Mray56

Con

"To say that the society wouldn't work because it has not been tested is ignorant. No society has yet attempted the brainwashing I have suggested, "

I never said no society has ever tested brainwashing. I had stated that brainwashing has never been tested successfully. Like North Korea. They are conditioning right from birth. This has been proven to be successful by the thousands of people that try and rebel a year. People are now refraining from rebellion out of pure fear, not brainwashing. You indicate that humans in general are stupid when they're not. You can only brainwash someone to a certain extent.

http://www.mirror.co.uk...

http://www.theguardian.com...

http://www.vice.com...

“If tested it would be a success most likely.”

Your statements are making it easier for me to win. You base your arguments on personal belief with no facts or statistics. This is debate on whether or not it will be a good basis for society. We already see brainwashing in North Korea and it results in total unstability. Most North Koreans don’t want to live their. They realize thousands of people die of just starvation a year and if they say something wrong then they are sent to a prison camp.

Conclusion

Stalinism Is not a good basis for society. He has murdered hundreds of thousands of his own people with complete disregard for his own life. We see some of the most brutal forms of dictatorship today in North Korea. My opponent had regarded brainwashing as a successful technique in creating a stable and happy society. This has never been successfully practiced. In fact, the brainwashing is starting to deteriorate in North Korea. Thousands of people a year try to rebel or leave the country. This is just simply not a good basis for society.

Not only has my opponent failed to give any sources for this debate, he based his arguments off of personal opinion. Vote con

Debate Round No. 5
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by Mray56 3 years ago
Mray56
tied for most reliable sources? ouch...
Posted by cosecant 3 years ago
cosecant
hum...
Posted by inaudita 3 years ago
inaudita
I am the father of the pro Stalin debater.
I apologize to you people and the world for raising such an inconsiderate idiot.
I should have electrocuted him more.
Posted by Mray56 3 years ago
Mray56
Whoops forgot to post my links on my last argument. ill post them here.

http://www.pbs.org...
http://science.howstuffworks.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...
Posted by W1ll1ph0n3 3 years ago
W1ll1ph0n3
I'm a socialist but I don't think that stalinism is such a good idea. Killing hundreds of thousands of people won't help anyone. I believe in a democratic form of socialism, not a dictatorship.
Posted by Preston 3 years ago
Preston
saying communism, or Marxism is good, but Stalinism?
Posted by Samckey78 3 years ago
Samckey78
This seems ludicrous unless you are a socialist. Stalin has been described as a psychopath and anyone who agrees that murdering hundreds of thousands of people in the Gulags creates the "basis for a good society" is delusional. If by "1984" you mean the book then that's an even worse world (although fictitious). The bottom line is look at the success rate of socialist countries. There isn't success. Good luck with the argument.
Posted by Bullish 3 years ago
Bullish
STALIN? nac
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Define "slightly"
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Daktoria 3 years ago
Daktoria
inauditaMray56Tied
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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: First off, let me say that I staunchly disagree and don't sympathize with Pro at all. In fact, I agree with Con in saying the idea is "sick". However, Con repeatedly went on and on about specific real world examples which aren't necessarily representative of the general ideas that were proposed. He insisted on making practical rather than moral arguments which are contradictory to the notion of a "good" society as well. On top of that, Con makes a fallacious claim about neurology. Yes, neurologists claim that happiness is derived from hormones, but neurologists also claim that happiness can be materially calculated, and that those who don't fit materially calculated norms have mental problems. That said, Pro makes a fallacious claim as well which cost him conduct by saying, "To say that the society wouldn't work because it has not been tested is ignorant." People are entitled to be skeptical of that which isn't proven. They don't have to go with theories "just because".
Vote Placed by WillRiley 3 years ago
WillRiley
inauditaMray56Tied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's "Good society" involves brainwashing children to love the government. Does this sound like a good society to you?
Vote Placed by GOP 3 years ago
GOP
inauditaMray56Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Con used more sources.