Would a Nazified or Bolshevik world be better?
Debate Rounds (3)
I accept. I will argue that nazism is a very bad philosophy, and boshlevik under Lenin would of been the better alternative. I will not argue Stalin, as many agree he was not 100% boshlevik.
THE NAZI BELIEVE IN RACIAL SUPERIORITY OUTWEIGHS ALL OTHER ARGUMENTS. IF ANY COUNTRY WERE TO ADOPT NAZISM AT ITS CORE, THEY WOULD BE PROMOTING RACIAL SUPERIORITY.
NAZISM WAS CLASSIFIED AS A FORM OF FACISM, WHICH PROMOTES EXTREME NATIONALISM, AND A DANGEROUS AMOUNT OF MILITARY CONTROL.
Those are all the arguments I can make for now, as I am busy, so forgive me.
I'd like to thank Con for this debate and wish him luck in this and future debates. Vote Pro!
I will remind my opponent, this debate is not about Nazi Germany vs Soviet Union, but Boshlevikism or Nazism. I will also remind him I will not argue boshlevikism under Stalin,as hecreated his own philosophy known as Stalinism.
Argument 1: Reinforcement of Nazi Aryanism
As I said earlier, Supremacism outweighs all other factors. The very fact that a race is deemed impure, because of the way they are born is ridiculous.
Argument 2: Reinforcment of Facism
Once again, the Nazis practiced a superb amount of Facism. Either you shared complete ant utter obedience to the state, or you would be disposed of. While boshleviksm under Lenin was not nearly on the same level of facism.
Argument 3: Nazism was Totalitarian
One big difference between Nazi Germany and Lenins Boshlevikism, is that one was totalitarian and the other authoritarian. Totalitarian is an extreme form of total economic dominance, and while it works for short periods of time, eventually the system will always backfire. Citizens would be subjected to complete government dominance. A system now used in the DPRK and Republic of Cuba.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by STALIN 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||1||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro looked at the ways in which Stalin and the Soviet Union was bad, not how Bolshevism was bad. He talked about the Soviet crimes and how you could be shot for retreating in the Red Army. I felt that Con showed how Nazism was much worse since it believed in being born supreme and having a supreme race. Pro really needs to work on putting sources into his debates. I have read several of his debates and none of them have any sources.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.