Debate_Politics2
is ranked #78,187 out of 191,228 users
- Member since: 5/5/2008
About
Welcome to the Debates! Here are some guidelines for everyone to follow:
- Everyone is welcome to view the debates, but please only post here if you are directly involved in the debate
- The person who started the topic must present the first argument, unless otherwise instructed
- Please post in a timely fashion. If no response has been made within 48 hours, then the adjudicator can declare a winner. If you’re not going to be able to respond for longer than 48 hours, just let everyone know by posting on this profile.
- There are 3 categories in scoring: Argument, Evidence, and Refutation. It is important to consider all three to get maximum points.
- When citing sources, please don’t use Wikipedia â€" it is simply not reliable enough and you should be able to find the same information in at least 3 other places besides Wikipedia.
- Your best bet of getting a great score is to make very long, well organized posts. Short quips back and forth make it very hard for me to see your line of thought and so it is incredibly hard for me to score. There are old debates on every profile now, so look at some old good ones to get an idea of what you should be doing.
0
Armor Points
- 0 games rated
- 0 comments
- 0 forum posts
- 0 games submitted
- 0 merits
View all comments »Moegreche says:
Posted at 7:52pm on 10/17/2008
After judging and looking carefully over your past arguments, I have the score as:
Drace: 13
Ninjacube: 10
Drace, although some of your arguments seemed to fizzle out and were fallacious, you stuck to a consistent line of argumentation.
Ninja, I felt like you often went red herring in some of your arguments, and especially in response to my final questions. I found it very easy to follow your train of thought and you organize your thoughts very well.
Nice job, both of you!
Ninjacube says:
Posted at 5:09pm on 10/17/2008
Well, for your first question, the socialist programs in are a result of democrats in Congress. Unfortunately, not everyone in America's capital nation believes it is right. It's their right to think so just like it is my right to think it is right. With all conservatives in office I think it would be safe to say that Health care programs and Social Security programs would all be privately owned.
Your second question has been brought up many, many times in this debate and I think that there is economic freedom in capitalism. The poor immigrant couldn't afford to go to Harvard right away of course. He would have to work for it. That is the whole idea behind capitalism is that you work for what you get. If you work harder, or smarter, whichever you choose, you will be rewarded proportionally. Just to put this in comparison, in communism, you would have to work too. If you could NOT work and still get fed, then communism is flawed inherently and morally. I've brought this up before and has yet to be refuted =)
Your third question brings me back to politics. The real difference between Democrats and Republicans, Left and Right, Communism and Capitalism, is that the first supports equality and the latter supports freedom. Can it survive without its counterpart? Certainly. It has this far. As for communism, I think there is a good reason as to why one hasn't been successfully been set up on a large scale yet. (hint, hint) And, finally, even if capitalism couldn't survive without equality, then communism wouldn't be able to survive without freedom.
Drace says:
Posted at 9:00pm on 10/10/2008
I suppose to understand Communism to its full extent, you'd have to start with Marx's own works.
His most important, the Communist Manifesto.
Its quite not too easy of a read though. I myself have not read it, haha. Its quite of a shame since I don't have too much of an understanding over what other communists talk about and am pretty much limited to argue with my own arguments. :-$
Heres a nice little toon of it.
http://www.youtube.com/v/B1IME451NDY
Drace says:
Posted at 7:16pm on 10/8/2008
Hehe I looked at your argument on Ninja. This caught my eye: "Is there really true economic freedom for everyone in a capitalist economy?"
I could just use the determinist argument to say good bye to the whole thing, but I feel that will lead into a whole another discussion, so...
The third world countries are pretty much a creation of capitalism. The US's amazing wealth is a result of mass exploitation of other countries, especially places like Latin America.
These places really have no or not much of regulations on "Treating workers fairly"
Side Note: Notice how nothing is "Made in the US"...
So if someone comes to the US from El Savador or something looking for a better life, it can be said that it was the fault of the US for such conditions.
The US bourgeois (The capitalists) are able to buy off their proletariat (their workers) because of the massive wealth.
1) Well such an economy would form in the higher stage of communism. For one this has never existed, and at the current state, I suppose it will cause troubles. I would argue though that under communism, obtaining more technological instruments of production will become crucial. This should lead to revolutionary ideas perhaps.
Before this, I would suppose that currency might as well be used. There are 100s of different views on it. Such matters would be something to discuss when the war has won.
Like the Convention that took place in the US...
2) This is correct. Note that communism calls for a world revolution. So when capitalism is defeated, no such thing is a problem. This surely might seem totally crazy at its first impression, but keep in mind it has happened throughout number of times in history.
Btw, I don't think we'll call it a 'country' if its stateless.
Eg...
Capitalism won over feudalism with a series of revolutions throughout the world.
Also note that it seems that a revolution in a certain place gives will for another of a different place. Leading to a chain reaction of events.
The U.S's revolutionary war influenced Frances...
Russia's revolution empowered that of Germany (I think)
3) Well why call anything not stateless Communist? All the states that have deemed themselves communist go no farther then their socialism. Most communists would even argue that these states were not even socialist.
China surely is not communist nor even socialist!
Despite that, the path to communist must include a socialist stage in which the use of a state is used to encounter the remaining capitalist states. This is only the Marxist - Leninst viewpoint though. The left anarchists completely reject it and want to go for a quick transformation to communism, skipping socialism.
Imagine the Soviet Union without a state though. Mass embargoes and harassments from the West, a massive war, an agricultural land...
I would see a need for a state until things are stable enough to lead into a greater democracy.
__
Wow Moe, how do you score such things?
Moegreche says:
Posted at 8:31am on 10/8/2008
These are some very nice arguments. Right now the score is pretty close, but mostly because you guys aren't finding the holes in each others' arguments :)
So, I would like to pose a question to each of you and I will decide the winner based on your response to my refutation.
@ Drace:
You argue that money is not needed in a Communist economy, but I see a few problems with this statement. 1) There has never been a Communist economy that did not use money (except for hunter/gatherers. 2) Without some form of currency, a Communist economy would have to be completely independent since it wouldn't be able to buy things from other countries. 3) You argue that Communism is stateless, but again this isn't the case historically.
@ Ninjacube:
If capitalism is a morally better choice (which seems to be what you're arguing) then why do have socialist reforms like welfare, Social Security, and Medicaid? Is there really true economic freedom for everyone in a capitalist economy? Certainly a poor immigrant family could not afford to send their child to Harvard, so how is education equal? Can capitalism still be successful without striving for equality?
So, you get one response each to your particular question. Let me know when you're done!