The Instigator
billsands
Pro (for)
The Contender
stansyYT
Con (against)

if a nation is run consistantly by a socialist party it is socialist

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
stansyYT has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/3/2019 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 week ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 176 times Debate No: 123569
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (19)
Votes (0)

 

billsands

Pro

Sweden may not be socialist but for decades socialists ran the place, And ran it very well for the most part, China has embraced market policies to out of necessity but is still run by the communist party, My point is all it really takes for a society to be socialist is to have people with honest socialist values in control, Socialism is a very new idea and attempts to make it work have often failed badly, So new things are tried, But the goals are the same a good life for the average person opportunities do do better, Access to education housing and health care and food for all member of a society, And attempts to make society more equitable remain
stansyYT

Con

Alright so to start off, All because a Government is ran mostly by socialists members would not make it a socialist nation, One basic reason is because most countries such as the USA already has a system set up to keep it the way it is. For example lets say for what ever reason most of the members in the USA government became socialists, The country would still be democratic. There are admendments and different ways the country runs that would keep it the way it is. Yes some changes of course will come but overall the country would remain the same if it already has a strong government and way of living. Another factor to add in is the people, You can't just change up everything for people in the country it takes time, And if your try too people wouldn't allow it them selves and cause tons of riots, Protesting ect. In conclusion so far all because most of the members change does not mean it will be change the whole country to being a socialist country
Debate Round No. 1
billsands

Pro

Socialist parties advocate for socialist policies so even if they supervise a capitalist system they have socialist goals that they make that economy work for
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Leaning 1 week ago
Leaning
Makes sense in a way.
Without good there can not be evil.
No yin, No yang, Type of thought.
Posted by billsands 1 week ago
billsands
without order there is no freedom
Posted by Leaning 1 week ago
Leaning
Heh, Probably true.
Posted by notaparadox 1 week ago
notaparadox
yall been on this degenerate website so long you forgot books exist and real dialogue etiquette
Posted by notaparadox 1 week ago
notaparadox
I am paying attention that's why I addressed a separate point than the debate topic and used the comment section. You're not gunna learn anything from being edgy and pushy online other than that no one cares, But you'll keep looking stupid.

There's not tonnes of evidence for it. People know capitalism is too rigid in america in some areas like health and agriculture for example. Yes more """social""" approaches should be looked at. But not "socialist" approaches. Look for progress. Stop using the term "socialist" for your movement or philosophy or whatever if it doesn't follow any Marxist/Leninist philosophy. What you're talking about just sounds like capitalism with healthier regulations. If those regulations involve a lot of redistribution similar to socialist policies then it's probably a load of crap.

Though not all redistribution is bad for the health of society or the economy it must be a very careful tool used sparingly. There are plenty of ethical issues with large scale redistribution and plethora of examples of "social" policies being abrasive to people as individuals.
Posted by Leaning 1 week ago
Leaning
@billsands

The actions of a country, Speaking louder than words, Louder than their label.

If a man calls himself a vegetarian, Yet eats meat, Most would not consider him a vegetarian. Though arguments could be made that he is 'attempting to follow a vegetarian way of life, And considers himself a vegetarian for that reason.
Many paths in life are not followed with completeness, Yet people are still considered what they call themselves, If they appear to be trying, Or have other factors involved.

I don't know if I would consider the Nazi's socialist or not, I would have to do more research on the subject.

I suppose if a nation was run by a socialist party, 'and followed a socialist agenda to a 'certain extent, I might consider the nation to be socialist.
Although, I could argue a socialist party ran a government, But did not 'implement any socialist policies, The country would not be socialist.
But I do not care for that argument. As I 'mostly agree with the title of this debate, I am not especially motivated to debate you.
I could play devils advocate, But no argument occurs to me yet.
Posted by Leaning 1 week ago
Leaning
@billsands
I think it could be argued that there are forms of society that more or less encourages the freedom or enslavement of the individual.

Individuals being sovereign over themselves is a large motivation to anarchists and libertarions, I imagine. As well as what frightens a number of people 'away from socialism, I think. People. . . Are more willing to accept government when it is 'necessary I think. Many socialist party ideas don't seem necessary to people I assume.
Posted by billsands 1 week ago
billsands
well was nazi germany socialist? Was the german democratic republic democratic? Hm
Posted by Leaning 1 week ago
Leaning
@billsands
Eh, If there was a God, He'd still be listening I imagine. But still not much reason to expect him to act maybe.
Posted by Leaning 1 week ago
Leaning
I considered it, But was too lazy to consider the question.
I might accept it, But first I'm going to have to think about why the statement
"if a nation is run by a socialist party it is socialist"
Would be considered true or false.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.