CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Can Socialism work? If it can, should it?
I want to get an intelligent debate going on this topic. It seems I can't speak of socialism/communism without illogical people just saying it can't work without any sort of logic as to why that is the case. Let's settle it right here. Give reasoning to explain why it can or cannot work, then explain if it should or you wish it could.
I don't see why It can't. There is a huge reservoir that is all the rich people, take it from them, because they're the one who have been exploiting us for gain in the first place, then distribute it among the common people. Have it so employees are basically board members who have a vote in what is done with wages and company profits. If they want to stick the cash in their pockets, amen. If they want to reinvest in their company, amen. Then, because people will have more money, taxes can be increased, which can go to provide services for everybody like healthcare, and higher education.
The richest 1% in the United States don't have enough accumulated wealth to fix social security, much less the other thousands of social services. If they can take whatever they want from those with a lot, guess who else they can take whatever they want from whether they have a lot or not..
It would certainly help fix those issues. And the reality is rich people wouldn't be rich without poor people. You could argue they took the money. It's better to have it balanced than an economic free for all.
Of course it can work. In theory it's the fairest known economic system. The problem is stopping capitalists from sabotaging it. Some very powerful people stand to lose everything if socialism becomes the norm, and they will go to quite literally any lengths to prevent it.
I hate it man. It's really not that different from being a slave imo.
It's even worse than that because capitalism doesn't need to use force. Instead, it "manufactures consent" (borrowing a phrase used by Ed Herman/Noam Chomsky). With force there is always the risk of rebellion. If you run a system based entirely on brainwashing people then rebellion is much less likely to ever be a problem. It becomes very easy to turn public opinion against the rebels by framing them as the bad guys.
It is so refreshing to hear someone else that has the exact same standpoint on capitalism. I find everyone just kind of buys into it for no good reason and then shuns anyone that doesn't buy into it. Guess that's part of the brainwashing. So how the hell can it be stopped? I don't know if it can be done politically. I feel it would need a revolution. It's simply too ingrained.
So how the hell can it be stopped? I don't know if it can be done politically. I feel it would need a revolution. It's simply too ingrained.
I have felt much the same way at times, but Marx warned specifically that a violent revolution would simply bring about another form of dictatorship. Lenin ignored him and the world got Stalin. The only true way to end the tyranny is education. If your political thinking is disproportionately more advanced than most other people it can be incredibly frustrating, I know, but you should not give up hope. If you look at the bigger picture (i.e. 100 lifetimes instead of only one) then it becomes difficult to deny the education of the people has led to progressively better social conditions. It is just an unfortunate curse that your understanding is ahead of its time.
Your local fire department is socialism personified.. The government owns the means of production.. Everybody pays for fire protection and everybody is covered... It seems to work pretty good. What's more socialistic than that??
We CAN and SHOULD do the same thing with health care..
However, the above programs ONLY work within the framework of capitalism, because if incentive is removed from the equation, the equation falls apart..
Indeed, they ARE.. The government OWNS the means of production.. Everybody PAYS for it and EVERYBODY gets it EQUALLY. Uhhhh, that's socialism.
Wanna know something else, poochy boy??? The MILITARY is ALSO socialism.. The government OWNS the means of production.. We ALL pay for it, and we ALL get it.
What??? Have you ever BOUGHT police or fire protection??? Do you have a private army???
Universal Healthcare ? Okay if that is true in your mind were do all of the medical devices come from ? Government ? So you are STUPID and CONFUSED ! Capitalism manufactures the X-ray machines ! LMAO your STUPIDITY is glaring !!!!!!!!!!!!!
EVERY economic or governance system CAN work, given the right set of circumstances and the right timing. Pretty much NONE of them work forever. That's why we have a world of change happening around us constantly. If any one form of economy and governance was so wildly successful it became a no brainer then most of the world would then adopt that, eventually. They don't. Because there isn't. They all have their warts. And also the needs and influence of the people they serve have their warts, too.
America did very well under democratic socialism until Reagan stepped in and started "trickle UP" capitalism. He called it trickle down, but he WAS having a confusion syndrome. Anyway, Teddy Roosevelt broke up the American oligarch (Russia has it now), and we slowly worked into democratic socialism. We had our best years after the NEXT Roosevelt took over. One was a Republican, one a Democrat. We need that kind of non-partisanship working FOR America, again. Reagan killed a portion of it and we've been in turmoil ever since. Those that want to "MAGA" MOSTLY don't even know what America was when it WAS GREAT! When it WAS democratic socialism ... which seemed to generate much more non-partisanship. I wish (hope) we make America great again, Trump will NOT do it. HE could destroy U.S.
Crazy AL if it was not for capitalism you would not have a means for spewing your stupidity !
LOL. Yeah, capitalism invented computers, outlaw. It wasn't like, science, or anything crazy like that. Without capitalism there would be no technological evolution of any kind. Ahahahahahahahahaha!
Except wait, technological evolution predates capitalism by some 96 thousand years. Go figure.
Yes Outlaw. Because politicians didn't build my computer that therefore means capitalism built it. Don't you ever tire of the absurd logical fallacies you throw into every post?
Science built your computer you two-bit white trailer trash moron. Do you think it's a strange coincidence that Bolshevik Russia managed to build exactly the same kind of stuff? Technological evolution happens independently of capitalism, communism, socialism, or any other kind of economic system. By your trailer trash logic Nazism put you on the Moon.
So the UK does not need any domestic trade ? The UK has it's own capitalistic system that can supply the people of the UK with the consumable goods they need ?
I enjoy watching a dummy like yourself try to understand where you stand on any issue because you cannot do it. Capitalism is a part of life without it you could not exist !
Below is a list showcasing 15 of United Kingdom’s top trading partners in terms of export sales. That is, these are countries that imported the most UK shipments by dollar value during 2016. Also shown is each import country’s percentage of total UK exports.
United States: US$60.4 billion (14.8% of total UK exports)
Germany: $43.6 billion (10.7%)
France: $25.9 billion (6.3%)
Netherlands: $25.6 billion (6.3%)
Ireland: $22.9 billion (5.6%)
Switzerland: $18.9 billion (4.6%)
China: $18 billion (4.4%)
Belgium: $15.8 billion (3.9%)
Italy: $13.1 billion (3.2%)
Spain: $12.7 billion (3.1%)
United Arab Emirates: $9 billion (2.2%)
Hong Kong: $8.8 billion (2.2%)
Japan: $6.4 billion (1.6%)
Canada: $6.2 billion (1.5%)
Sweden: $6.1 billion (1.5%)
Capitalism is really a bad thing LMMFAO and look at the top of the list
You are so fucking backwards it's unbelievable. Capitalism has been around for about 200ish years. Humans lived long before that. You are simply not listening to what anybody says and shutting your ears like a child. You are a weak son of a bitch who has to avoid logic because if you don't you would realize how falsified your world view is.
And created the largest economy by far in human history.
Bullshit. You are deliberately confusing capitalism with the industrial revolution and trying to deceive people into believing they are the same thing. Economies grow when cheaper technology is introduced on a widespread scale. For example, the economy of Russia grew steadily under communism, as this graph proves:-
Socialism would have no rich regular citizens, and you'd still be fucking poor. I have a great life. Why would I want your horseshit nonsense because you yourself are stupid and a failure? You needing someone to help you out because you're a fucking little retard who can't make a decent living isn't my problem. It is your fucking problem.
To live in America and not make a good living means you must be one hell of a dumbass.
That is because the definition of rich is having more than everybody else. You are so fundamentally stupid and ignorant, you actually believe it is a bad thing that other people will not have more than you do.
you'd still be fucking poor
God, you are just so incredibly stupid. So where does all the extra money go?? If there are suddenly no rich people, and everyone is poor, then where does all the wealth go which was previously being hoarded by the rich people?
You are incapable of thinking anything through properly because you literally are a fucking IDIOT. That is why you post here on a dozen different accounts: because you are a fucking IDIOT.
Give me one example that says technology doesn't progress without capitalism. Just 1. The reality is you won't find any example of that. People innovate regardless of their economic system. Look at history; We had clubs, then spears, then swords, then bigger swords, then muskets, then cannons. All without capitalism. That's just 1 area of advancement as well. For example the printing press which was a huge invention at the time, happened without capitalism. Oh yeah I just remembered something else too that almost everyone sees everyday. The wheel. It was invented way way way before capitalism. All your arguments are simply unfounded and based on nothing at all.
Hate to tell you man, but you're the one spewing stupidity. Capitalism didn't create the idea of free speech. To assert that you can't have one without the other is bollocks.
Hate to tell you man, but you're the one spewing stupidity. Capitalism didn't create the idea of free speech.
Capitalists believe capitalism is singularly responsible for every technological achievement and good idea humanity has ever produced, even dating back to before capitalism was invented. It's part of the brainwashing and part of the reason you just can't argue with them. It's like trying to convince a Christian that God didn't put their food on the table.
Yeah. The only way you could convince them is to strip them of their ideas of capitalism but it's all they know. To do so would shatter their world view. When you consider that, I understand why they fight it tooth and nail but what they don't realize is that almost everyone's lives would be much better.
Can forms of socialism work? Yes, of course they can. That's why things like state schools, public roads, public water systems, etc. exist. If you want to see unrestrained capitalism in action, then go to Somalia and see how you like it.
The non-facetious answer to the question I suspect you were actually trying to ask, does a fully socialist state system work, is that the historical evidence mostly suggests that it does not. It's important to note, however, that this doesn't mean, as some conservatives try to suggest, that trying to ameliorate the extremes of capitalism or trying to add those socialist aspects which can be seen to work is somehow automatically doomed to failure.
The non-facetious answer to the question I suspect you were actually trying to ask, does a fully socialist state system work, is that the historical evidence mostly suggests that it does not.
This is quite simply a complete aberration of the facts. The best economic system is not decided by a war any more than the best comic book is decided by an after school fight in the playground. The historical evidence shows that America did everything in its economic and military power to prevent socialism from even taking a grip, let alone succeeding as a viable alternative for the future.
NATIONAL SOCIALISM worked great until the conspiracists defeated it! Go read on the economic recovery when NS took over. There’s a certain group of bankers that will have you killed if you try to start your own money😉
Get ready to have no say in which doctor you see. You like Dr. Johnson? Too bad. This is socialized. You want to go to a doctor an hour away? Too bad. This is socialized. You want to see a doctor today? Bwahahahaha! Ahem. Good luck with that.
It can't work. It is the gospel of envy, the equal sharing of misery, as Churchill put it. As Margaret Thatcher said, Socialism's problem is eventually you run out of other peoples' money.
A system of "equality" has fatal flaws.
1)If you don't reward hard work, and reward sloth equally, all you will get is sloth.
2)No one would have any incentive to do a skilled or hard job.
3)It demands rationing. Rationing of meds, medical attention, and food. Venezuela is a current example of Socialism in practice. The food has been rationed "equally" on a card. But that amount of food equals? Starvation. There are people hunting pets for food. It was a rich, healthy nation like the U.S. Now it's a third world hellhole on the brink of civil war. They'd love to be under a Capitalist system. What you find with the government is they are horrible at running things. Just go to a typical DMV and tell me how your government controlled experience was.
4)The lines and waiting lists to see a doctor are enormous. You'll die or get well before you receive help many times. When meds are free? Lines are obnoxiously long. Imagine the hypochondriac response to free medical...
5)And of course we know it isn't really free. Socialists put the bill on their children's credit card. The problem becomes your children's problem.
6)Your work pay will be decimated by taxes. Enjoy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9TWuO5dBYjo The reality is that some people will get fucked by any healthcare system and some will benefit from them. I see just as much if not more info to say socialized medicine works VS. it not working.
Well maybe that's because you're a greedy person. What if the job was interesting and gave good career fulfillment that had a greater impact on the world beyond financial gain? People will enjoy that aspect of work. Just because you wouldn't doesn't mean no one else can.
The problem with pure socialism is that if people don't naturally flow into certain professions, the system is obligated, in order to not collapse, to force people to do jobs they don't want to do. So you very well could end up being a surgeon making nothing for wages. And then, should I trust a surgeon who was forced to be a surgeon and makes nothing for wages to cut on my body?
Okay but why do you assume people wouldn't want those roles? People are willing to take shit jobs in capitalism and I'm sure there are people with the desire to be surgeons from a scientific and not economic standpoint.
Socialism doesn't mean people can't get paid more for higher skilled professions. The margin is just smaller. The ratio would be the poorest person getting 1, the richest getting 8 times the poorest.
Socialism doesn't mean people can't get paid more for higher skilled professions. The margin is just smaller
Try to fill the medical workforce by "making the margin smaller". They struggle to do so as it is. Overworked and understaffed. That pay cut should be a welcome change.
Why should a person doing minimum wage work make more moderate wages? I was raised poor, went and got grants, worked my ass off, and make more. They chose not to. That's their choice to work at Wal mart, not mine.
Okay but why is that? Some sort of egotistical vindication? It's about getting more than other people so you can feel special? Why don't we accept that we're all on the same boat and contribute our part and receive benefits from other contributions? Why does it have to be a game?
I think people will do high skilled jobs regardless of higher wages. You have to realize as well that everyone will be paid a lot more so people won't hesitate to take high skill jobs. And as I also said in the other comment I left, not everyone will get the exact same wage. The ratio would be 1 to 8 from the poorest to richest.
How about stopping corporate tax avoidance. Also if the max wage is 8 times minimum then that's a shitload off the top that can be spread around to increase the average wage.
Maybe some people like being at the job that's a 1. You talk as if the only incentive to do anything in life is how much money is in it for me and how lazy can I be. Do you really think people are that one dimensional?
I'm sure there are people with the desire to be surgeons from a scientific and not economic standpoint.
We have a shortage of doctors and surgeons now, as we speak, and that's while being paid handsomly. Imagine it once we flood them due to "free healthcare" and take away their high wages.
If we can't save people for the sake of saving people and have to use greed as an incentive, maybe we don't deserve those doctors. I'd rather rely on a system that is more about us as a species and civilization vs the economic free for all that capitalism is. A barren wasteland not much different from the rules of the wild being savage animals that have political abilities and trick other s of their own kind into exploitation and suffering.
For the romantics Socialism seems to offer some advantages over Capitalism.
In reality it has never worked and never will.
This form of economic system which centres on common ownership, government controls all price and production levels.
Another feature of this failed ideology means that government has most, if not full control of people's lives, including where to live, how much they earn and what benefits they may receive.
Taxes have to be higher in Socialist systems as the government needs to subsidise the public services which are either free or provided at below cost so the wealth and job creating entrepreneurs relocate to a free market/Capitalist society where their talents will be rewarded'
Unions and workers have too much power and, as been demonstrated many times, when 'the tail wags the dog' inevitably disaster ensues.
Socialism pretty well eliminates ambition driven motivation.
The ''American Dream' which rewards hard work, innovation and self reliance is sidelined in favour for a less stressful life and promotes the fanciful notion that everyone is owed a living so they lay back and enjoy a life of state benefits, UNTIL THE STATE RUN OUT OF DOSH WITH WHICH TO PAY FOR THE FREE HANDOUTS.
The concept of ''THE STATE'' CONTROLLING PEOPLE'S LIVES 'FROM CRADLE TO GRAVE' SIMPLY DOES NOT WORK IN REALITY.
1)"This form of economic system which centres on common ownership, government controls all price and production levels."
That's simply not true. Worker cooperatives are a system of private ownership that operate within socialist economies and generate it's own welfare making everyone have better living standards on average.
2)"Another feature of this failed ideology means that government has most, if not full control of people's lives, including where to live, how much they earn and what benefits they may receive."
Give me specific examples otherwise this doesn't mean anything.
3)"Unions and workers have too much power and, as been demonstrated many times, when 'the tail wags the dog' inevitably disaster ensues."
I understand the analogy but translate this into real examples in history because that really isn't saying anything. It's on you to explain why it doesn't work and an analogy about a dog won't cut it.
4) "The ''American Dream' which rewards hard work, innovation and self reliance is sidelined in favour for a less stressful life and promotes the fanciful notion that everyone is owed a living so they lay back and enjoy a life of state benefits, UNTIL THE STATE RUN OUT OF DOSH WITH WHICH TO PAY FOR THE FREE HANDOUTS."
There are plenty of people within capitalism that work very hard and have no prospect of seeing financial advancement and live pay check to pay check. It's getting worse as well.
For the romantics Socialism seems to offer some advantages over Capitalism.
For intellectually challenged idiots it makes more sense that 90 percent of society struggle so that the other 10 percent can live like kings. This makes perfect sense of course, which they prove by twisting language in order to mock you. Poverty, starvation and homelessness are all acceptable prices to pay because the alternative is to be a hopeless romantic.
In reality it has never worked and never will.
In reality it has been sabotaged and/or destroyed by American capitalists every time it has ever been tried. You are such corrupt, dishonest, self-centred pigs, that you have attacked it all over the world, in South America, in Asia and in Europe, and after winning the Cold War you now simply pretend that you had nothing to do with its demise. The reality is that it DID work, at least as well as capitalism worked, for over seventy years, until the arms race against America led to the breakdown of the Soviet economy. In fact, it was precisely Soviet military strength during WW2 which made Americans so paranoid about "the red scare" in the first place. Your empty rhetoric and repetition of standardised appeals to fallacy when discussing the left are direct representations of the state propaganda Americans lived through during the Cold War.
You are a dishonest fucking moron with a bizarrely revisionist understanding of contemporary history and that is a fact.
What do you mean? That it doesn't make sense to question capitalism? I really hope that's not what you mean.
That's exactly what he means. Amarel is a deceiver who uses psychological tricks to try to influence what people think. This particular "The Emperor Has No Clothes" fallacy is one of his favourites. He throws out an unsupported -- usually stupid -- assertion and hints that it is foolish to dispute it. Fear of mockery persuades a lot of people to simply accept his premise without questioning it.
There are lots of things to question about capitalism, but whether it works is not one of them. The history of Capitalisms success, especially when compared to the history of socialisms obismal failures, would lead people to ask if socialism can work; We already know that capitalism does.
The degree to which economic freedom is adopted correlates to degrees of economic success. The correlation is so obvious, that even Communist China has moved toward Capitalism.
Socialism cannot work at all unless there is enough of a capitalistic host for the parasitic socialist to survive.
Actually, you've got it backwards. Capitalism cannibalises socialism. What socialism requires is a self supporting socialist network not a capitalist host. Also socialism by definition adopts economic freedom, that's the whole point of it.
Economic Freedom and Capitalism are synonymous. Socialism requires the price information provided by capitalism. Socialism requires the wealth provided by capitalism. Socialism requires innovation provided by capitalism.
The trouble is these terms are too vague in meaning. Freedom is a classic example. We have to ask freedom from what? Freedom from poverty/starvation, maybe capitalism can provide that. But it seems to do so at other peoples expense. Freedom from meaningless labour? In many case capitalism fails with this. Marx was interested in ending the exploitation of the proletariat by bringing back the means of production into the hands of the people and ending alienation from the products of their labour. Extreme capitalism favours markets over people, quantity over quality. However, to what extent these problems are down to the system or down to human nature is a difficult question. The two seem to go hand in hand.