Debate Info

141
169
Capitalism Communism
Debate Score:310
Arguments:167
Total Votes:396
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Capitalism (77)
 
 Communism (78)

Debate Creator

Micmacmoc(2154) pic



Capitalism VS Communism

Capitalism VS Communism

Capitalism

Side Score: 141
VS.

Communism

Side Score: 169
11 points

Capitalism is better. Communism enslaves each individual to the community. Capitalism allows each individual to be free and independent.

Communism never makes progress because individuals are not given a just reward for improving things, while capitalism constantly improves. Communism lacks the economic freedom of choice to the fullest extent possible, in Capitalism people are free to choose what they want. Communism gives the lazy as much as the hard working, while capitalism allows each individual to sell their labor, creating a result where the hardest working are rewarded in accordance to how hard they work. In capitalism each person is independent, in communism each person is interdependent, interdependence is a form of slavery. In communism people work where the central Government tells them to, while in capitalism they work where they want.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
7 points

First off, the objective of Communism is the freedom of the individual. Communism does not give the lazy as much as the hard-working, 8th Plank of the communist manifesto- Those who do NOT contribute to the collective good will not get the fruits of labor of the collective good. And you are free in a communist society because no longer will you have to live in poverty. And what do you mean by no economic freedom, there is no such thing as money in communism."In communism people work where the central Government tells them to" There is no state in a communist society and before the state disappears, everyone is the government, "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat"-A temporary dictatorship of the WORKING CLASS, until the state disappears.

420 days ago | Side: Communism
steve789(159) Disputed
5 points

Its a delusional objective...because the centralization of industry elimates the freedom of choice to buy what one wants, and work where one wants. Added it may not reward anything to those who give no contribution, but it gives no reward for how much one contributes.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
Sulith(507) Disputed
1 point  

Why the hell would you want a collective good?

Those who do NOT contribute to the collective good will not get the fruits of labor of the collective good.

Next sentence you say And you are free in a communist society because no longer will you have to live in poverty.

Then what the fuck happens to the lazy? Do they get exterminated? Deported? Jailed?

Communism is a fat contradiction. Stalin and many others have already proved that Communism does not work.

409 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

Capitalism is always distorted by the left into this selfish mentality that all you crave is money. Capitalism begins with the right of private property. It means the separation of state and the economy, in the same form that the state does not control religion. It is a system in which mans actions are voluntary, and not forced, they are free to comply or not, based upon their own convictions and values, not upon what the state believes is in the best interest of the "greater good"

233 days ago | Side: Capitalism
anarchyguy(12) Disputed
0 points

If capitalism is better than communism, then why did the major capitals (UK, U.S., USA) live on the economic crisis? Which is why there is this crisis depressing? Why capitalist countries are on the verge of bankrupt? Was it because the working class will don't want working or the monopoly guy want to take care of money? Capitalism living in money and exploiting the working class! This is the biggest flaw of capitalism. If capitalism is freedom, then freedom is just a theory. So it is better to say that the capitalist world live in a dictatorship and not a democracy!

418 days ago | Side: Communism
Regarding(11) Disputed
2 points

umm can you name one prosperous communist country, o wait me neither! you call this economic crises in the free world, i agree. but the last "successful" communist country russia collapsed in economic turmoil due to communism. also it would be suprising to you to know that much of our turmoil is government caused. for instance our deflating dollar and realestate bubble pop. caused by the wonderful FED printing money out of thin air with out any support value faster than i can pass go in monopoly after rolling double ones. the housing bubble pop, the cause of fannie mac and banks loaning credit to bad buyers from encouragement by our great government. i agree capitalism has many problems. but in a imperfect world i must pick the lesser of two evils, that is capitalism.

411 days ago | Side: Capitalism
Sulith(507) Disputed
1 point  

Want to know why? Because no country has truly free Capitalism. Capitalist are in bed with the government or vice versa. Until a country can produce a true example of capitalism and absolutely free trade. Capitalism will always have a bad name.

409 days ago | Side: Capitalism
2 points

To the extreme either system of distribution is doomed to failure due to human nature.

Some utopian change in human nature, or an over abundance of all necessities coupled with some end to the need for undesirable labor (labor people tend not to want to do, like dig ditches), would lead to communism as a more desirable system when we are speaking of the extremes.

As it is, in order for the majority of humans to have a desire to contribute to their society, it requires incentive. Financial gain is the incentive that works best at this point it would seem.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
ThePyg(6548) Clarified
4 points

To the extreme either system of distribution is doomed to failure due to human nature.

So the only way to fix this is to have non-humans make decisions for us.

kkk.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

Not necessarily, you could always grow up in a different society-based on helping- it is almost a fact that your attitude is related to the type of society you live in. That is not the only way of course but it can help.

419 days ago | Side: Communism
Coldfire(598) Clarified
3 points

To the extreme either system of distribution is doomed to failure due to human nature.

Can you please clarify what you mean by “human nature?”

I will say that I agree that either side of the communism vs. capitalism debate taken to the extreme is doomed to failure. But I think I would disagree with you on the cause of such a failure depending on how you view human nature.

I believe that we are simply born into a corrupt system, and any attempt at adjusting to that corrupt system only makes someone corrupt. Not because it’s in our nature to be corrupt, but because it’s in our nature to react to stimuli in order to survive.

Do you believe that it is in humans’ nature to be greedy or competitive or whatever? Or do you think it’s in our nature to react to a situation in order to survive. If the former, than I can see why you would think human nature is the cause of the systems failure. If the latter, I find it hard to see how that would be a cause to the failure but rather a symptom to something more fundamental within the system itself.

Some utopian change in human nature

I don’t think anyone is suggesting a “utopian” change to anything, just a more productive/ethical change to the system that is currently in effect. I don’t believe we will ever be perfect, but there’s no sense in trying to submit to a system that doesn’t work or that only benefits a select few when there are far better methods.

an over abundance of all necessities coupled with some end to the need for undesirable labor

Indeed, scarcity is the issue. And it’s even scarcity that creates some of those undesirable jobs. At any rate, and this is just my opinion, I believe technology is the method for bringing about such a change. That, and a drastic change in incentive and fellowship.

As it is, in order for the majority of humans to have a desire to contribute to their society, it requires incentive. Financial gain is the incentive that works best at this point it would seem.

Yes, as unfortunate as it is, I agree that financial gain is the fabricated incentive of our time. And even more unfortunate that a catastrophe is required to bring us together and see new incentives, namely the simple selfless incentive of the well being of our fellow human.

419 days ago | Side: Capitalism
iamdavidh(4804) Clarified
1 point  

Do you believe that it is in humans’ nature to be greedy or competitive or whatever? Or do you think it’s in our nature to react to a situation in order to survive. If the former, than I can see why you would think human nature is the cause of the systems failure. If the latter, I find it hard to see how that would be a cause to the failure but rather a symptom to something more fundamental within the system itself.

Our nature is what causes societies, governments, etc. to function as they do. If our nature were different than our societies would be different. Hundreds of thousands of years of evolution dictating which views/behaviors in society best survive trumps that, over the last few thousand years or so, a handful of humans (compared to total populations) have realized that by changing, or at least understanding and controlling, our nature could theoretically lead to better societies for the whole. The idea that governments and societies are somehow the driving force, and can so easily be changed in their nature, is an illusion. We collectively presently are bound by our loose pack/tribal nature. Bury in communism, democracy, feudilism, combined with any system for the exchanging of goods and services, and you have the same individualism clashing with pack instinct which makes us what we are.

That is not to say some systems don't have better results for the whole. What it does mean, basically, is society is what it is because of us, we are not what we are because of society.

I don’t think anyone is suggesting a “utopian” change to anything, just a more productive/ethical change to the system that is currently in effect. I don’t believe we will ever be perfect, but there’s no sense in trying to submit to a system that doesn’t work or that only benefits a select few when there are far better methods.

So, say you are a caveman and basically it's a family unit where the strongest male rapes and steals whatever he likes, and since we're human and cannot survive on our own in the wild, what with mamoths and saber tooth tigers, we still stick around despite the inherent injustice of our lot in life (unless you should happen to be the biggest strongest male). If you are a lucky caveman tribe there are several "strongest" males so the power is somewhat balanced hopefully making things a little more fair, but it still likely sucks by todays standards for all but them.

Okay, our society would seem utopian to that caveman. However, their nature deemed that utopian change in society impossible. It has been through our long development that the strongest male raping and pilaging has become less advantageous to our survival. I'd argue "Some utopian change in human nature" is not only possible, but our natural tendency. It's just that it takes hundreds of thousands of years for us to naturally develop in that direction.

So, not sure what my point was. But I actually do argue for utopian change. I just feel it takes so long that the time we get there it does not seem so drastic or utopian.

Indeed, scarcity is the issue. And it’s even scarcity that creates some of those undesirable jobs. At any rate, and this is just my opinion, I believe technology is the method for bringing about such a change. That, and a drastic change in incentive and fellowship.

Agreed. And I think technology has accelerated the perceived change. Technolgoy is natural though, despite its designation otherwise. It was inevitable form the time the first caveman used a rock to break a nut, that some day if we survived we'd have airplanes, supercomputers, and smart phones. It is innevitable that if we survive, in a hundred thousand years we will have technologies that make smart phones, airplanes, and supercomputers look like a caveman using a rock to crack open a nut. And our societies will look just as primitive, brutal, and unfair to those future people as cavemen look to us today.

342 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

Of course people will say we are greedy, but live and have been brought up in a society based on competition. But if we lived in a society based on helping, we would be naturally humanitarian.

420 days ago | Side: Communism
steve789(159) Disputed
2 points

I get it so if you brainwash people not to reward themselves with self enjoyment they'll give all that they have worked hard for to someone else who hasn't earned it.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
2 points

Communism is flawed. If everyone is equal- there cannot be a leader. without a leader a society cannot operate. Therefore a leader is needed and it contradicts itself.

395 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

@deabteleader

"communism ... no more wars over land" !! except the Chinese Civil War.

"kids won't die for pointless reason ... mostly poverty related" !! except the Vietnamese famine.

"kind of like Democracy" !! except the population don't get to vote.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
7 points

Those countries were not communist, communism has never existed, I hear the same arguments over and over again and they are flawed because they think those countries were communist when they were not. Heard of "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat"? That is when the working class takes over the state until the state disappears.

420 days ago | Side: Communism
1 point  

At the end of the day, neither side is really 'free'. Both sides depend on people working, it's necessary to maintain any form of social or economic structure. But, in communism, you're not motivated at an individual level for the work that you do, whereas in capitalism, the ideal is that the harder/better you work, the more you receive from the community. Not only would I work better in this model, but I feel it is better at motivating the group, and developing society.

One of the main issues I do have with Capitalism is the difference between self interest and collective interest: they're hardly the same in many cases. That's why a mixed economy is needed, and where I feel that government interest is justified.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
3 points

That is the same argument which states that you get paid the same, however, according to the 8th plank of the communist manifesto by Karl Marx, Those who do not contribute to the collective good will not receive their share from the fruit of labor from the collective good . So you see, those who work will get rewarded accordingly. and if you think that Capitalism gives more motivation than Socialism, then I would like to point out that Socialist countries like Cuba, have more doctors per capital, and the fact that Socialist countries have lower unemployment rates, in fact one of the world's lowest unemployment rates.

420 days ago | Side: Communism
Cobrax30(22) Disputed
1 point  

What do you really know about Cuba?

You have to bring your own blanket to a hospital so run down and nasty you are more likely to die of an infection acquired there than if they performed surgery in your own home.

I know many Cubans who have family there. They will tell you the abject poverty those poor people live in.

If Capitalism is primarily driven by greed, then Communism is driven by envy. As communist countries either go capitalist or fail time and again... it amazes me that people still believe in it with a damn near religious fervor. Actually... it IS religion to many people and we should treat it as such.

408 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

Just because you have to work does not mean you are not free, if you don't work. If the farmer does not do his job then who will supply the builder with the strength to work? Life itself is about working, not all the time of course.

420 days ago | Side: Communism
BenWalters(1484) Disputed
3 points

If you have to do anything, you are not free to make your own decision. I don't think it's inherently bad, but I think it's true.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
blockman123(55) Disputed
1 point  

stop spamming dude. Like seriously your just sad that your capitalist grandfather touched you gently .

416 days ago | Side: Capitalism
steve789(159) Disputed
1 point  

The fact that a man can work for his own food, and shelter is what makes him independent. The fact that he don't have to give to another who is unwilling to also makes him free.

420 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

Exactly, he will work for his own food. The only thing different is the work place. And I told you already if you don't work you won't get anything if you work you will get something for your work.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
BenWalters(1484) Disputed
1 point  

But what if you don't work, in a purely capitalist state? You'd die. To me, that makes you need to work.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

this shouldn't even be a debate. factual every other communist society besides the two we still have today have all failed. communism has factual led every country to poverty. communism is one of the most unmotivating systems ever. why would i go be a doctor when i could sweep floors and still live the same life? drive and motivation is what encourages people to work hard and better themselves. the reward you get from something determines how much effort you will put into it and communism just creates a lazy country. it sounds nice on the outside but it cannot work in a country like the USA. there's too many selfish people that want to be better than you.

419 days ago | Side: Capitalism
3 points

Those are not even communist societies. There has never been a communist society. Communism calls for a STATELESS society. Oh and by the way. You don't get paid the same. I am tired of saying this- 8th plank of the Communist Manifesto, those who do not contribute to the collective good will not receive the fruits of labor of the collective good, this is obviously stating that you need to work to survive. So all of your arguments are misconceptions. Oh and for that greed argument- If you live in a bad society where based on wants and competition, you will be greedy , if you live in a society based on helping you will be humanitarian.

419 days ago | Side: Communism
Kickemout(14) Disputed
0 points

Communism is a form of government NOT a society. Stop trying to make comparisons with what is humans interacting with one another (society) and humans governing one another (government). Commies like to use wording to make it seem like the people run the show when it's a person running the show.

418 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Communism may look great in paper, but there is not one instance of socialism that has worked in practice.

The fundamental flaw to the "Marxist Theory" is that there is too much power in too few hands. This has and will always result in corruption as the few are made accountable to no one.

Capitalism is flawed there is no denying that, but communism especially the ones practiced by Vietnam, Nepal, Cyprus, disguise themselves as being democratic while taking away the fundamental human rights of their people.

This debate is important because it affects people, and while capitalism is flawed, communism in essence caters to the will of a favored few.

This is simple matter of choosing the lesser of the two evils.

419 days ago | Side: Capitalism
0 points

Just a reminder, don't jump between communism and Socialism because we are talking about socialism. Cuban doctors invented the lung cancer vaccine and there are doctors in Cuba per capital. That is a fact I put up in case you are going to talk about Socialism.

417 days ago | Side: Communism
1 point  

Communism is pure hell on earth. I talk to people who are from communist countries. That's the only argument you need. If these countries aren't communist then why do they say they are? Just because the p.o.s who got into power didn't want to give it up doesn't mean it's not a communist country. It's the indicator of why communism is fundamentally flawed...humans aren't machines!! Take off the Rosey Glasses and wake up to the atrocities of the last century imposed on innocents by commies. If you want communism, go fix N.Korea.

418 days ago | Side: Capitalism
3 points

Let me remind you those countries were not communist if you want to know what commuism is supposed to be like then read 'The Communist Manifesto" before you go around claiming that there was a communist regime. Oh and communism calls for no countries and the borders to be removed.

418 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

Those countries never said they are communist, they said they were socialist republics and even if they did call themselves communist, then by your logic, East Germany was great for the people because it called itself, The German DEMOCRATIC Republic. And it is an absolute fact that communism as a great nation never existed but it did exist as small communes or villages. There are some in the valleys of Spain and North America.

418 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

The USSR stood for Union Of Soviet SOCIALIST REPUBLICS. And DPRK stood for Democratic People's Republic Of Korea, the name sounds nice but North Korea democratic? No. But by you logic it is because they called themselves democratic. North Korea is not communist, get over it. And if you are going to call Cuba communist, I would just like you to know that people happy living there and it is not hell as you would describe it. And the majority of Cubans like Fidel Castro. You can't argue with me on that one because I am Cuban-Syrian.

418 days ago | Side: Communism
Kickemout(14) Disputed
1 point  

Communism, socialism fascism are all differences without distinction. All having killed so many of their own people I don't see how there is even an argument. Like I said before, you are also arguing between an economic structure and a political structure.

415 days ago | Side: Capitalism
Kickemout(14) Disputed
1 point  

No, that's is not my logic. My logic is no matter what u call it it's communism and always leads to the spending of all the wealth in the country and collapsing in on it's self. They are all communists.

415 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

I would also like to point out that this argument is between an economic structure (capitalism) and a form of government (communism). It should be between either Federal Republic and Communism or Capitalism and Command and Controlled Economy. To compare an economy structure to a form of government is like apples to oranges. Whatever though.

418 days ago | Side: Capitalism
2 points

I would like to point out that communism is also an economic system and there is no ruler if not the ruler is everyone. Now I know you don't know what communism is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communism also read the manifesto if you can or a summary of it.

418 days ago | Side: Communism
1 point  

I don't care what anyone says about Communism, Marxism, or any other kind of Socialist system. Karl Marx had a good idea as far as a base of understanding for a Socialist society, however I do not think that this type of system could be implemented into our capitalist society today. Marx common phrase “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs” actually sounds somewhat appealing, however, we live in a current society that would take advantage of such an idea. People would begin having many more “needs” and much less “ability,” which wouldn't fix anything in the long run. Communism is nothing more than disguised tyranny. Redistribution and "sharing" of wealth completely eliminates the incentive to do anything worthwhile. Not to mention a Communist system is generally one which brainwashes all of it's civilians into actually believing its for their own good. Anytime the government is given that much power you will see an inevitable fail from either the economy or the people will eventually overthrow their pathetic leaders whom they think is acting out of their best interest. I think arguing Capitalism vs Communism is sort of a broad range for argument seeing as both ideologies are interconnected to so many others. The pendulum generally swings in two different directions. One side is of freedom, independence, and backbone regulation (Don't kill, commit fraud, ect). The other side is a complete totalitarian authority (Communist dictatorship). We control everything because you're too inferior to know for your own good. Communism might be a more efficient system in times of hardship but it's only because everyone is basically sacrificing their existence to co-exist... We aren't even experiencing ACTUAL Capitalism in the USA today. People think and call this Capitalism but it's nothing more than a generic off brand, more like corporatism. The kicker with a Communist system is that it tries to say its "Egalitarian" yet the majority of the population suffer in poverty while the small minuscule elite parade around and enjoy vast amounts of wealth for themselves. This is why ANY and ALL Communist/Socialist systems are nothing more than disguised tyranny...

418 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

A quick look at history proves that, while communism looks great on paper, it ALWAYS degenerates into a crushing of the masses in favor of the elite. There is absolutely no exception that you can point to. Yes, capitalism has problems in that it is always a reflection of people and their selfishness, but so does communism, and that without any of the benefits of capitalism.

417 days ago | Side: Capitalism
2 points

What history? Communism has never existed! And if you want to see how a communist society is actually supposed to function, you could go visit those communist communes and villages. It is Impossible for communism to favor the elite because a communist society is supposed to be classless and stateless. Look up "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat". USSR was not communist, Cuba is not communist (Cuba is not a bad place actually) and North Korea is not communist. So those countries will never prove that communism is bad.

417 days ago | Side: Communism
canteenkenny(61) Disputed
1 point  

Have you read any of the stories of the many communes which sprang up during the 'Hippie' days? There were a few i visited north of San Francisco, and many others up and down the west coast, and probably in Europe too. They qualify as history. None of them survived beyond a decade or so. Why? Human nature. Eventually someone or some group discovers that they can run the show and take a bigger slice of the pie. Or some decide that they can't work as hard, and it is unfair that they are shorted at distribution time. How exactly do you determine fair distribution? For every 10 people you ask, you are likely to get 11 different answers. And there will always be the slug who does not work. Can the group really just cut him off?

Sorry. Great theory, but reality does not back it up. Never has, never will. That's why you can find countless versions of capitalism in history (and many of them did very well) , but no examples of communism that last long enough to be called successful.

416 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

Communism violates human rights .

413 days ago | Side: Capitalism
Coldfire(598) Clarified
2 points

Whether true or false, this is a statement, not an argument.

Please add something to the debate.

412 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

Communism violates human rights .

413 days ago | Side: Capitalism
anarchyguy(12) Disputed
1 point  

Capitalism violates human rights too. United Stades, United Kindom and European Union destroyed the Iraqi people.

411 days ago | Side: Communism
Regarding(11) Disputed
1 point  

that was not capitalsim, that was war. thats like me saying russia destroyed afghan, all the eastern european countries and germany because of communism. after russia conquered these countires and tried to implement communism yes they became even more destroyed.but the direct takeover of these countries was not communist's doing, so it was after conquest did these countires fail, the difference between east and west berlin after the soviet collapse is the perfect stark image of two economic ideals at work. and i think we all know which one did better.

411 days ago | Side: Capitalism
warrior(1372) Disputed
1 point  

oh you mean like the ussr did when they invaded Afghanistan and imprisoned there own people in Siberian prison camps and what about pol-pot remember that genocidal ass hole and Che Guevara killed over 100 gays, intellectuals, capitalists, and religious leaders each the Nazis only killed over 60000 people communists have killed over 100,0000 over the years conclustion commies are even worse than Nazis

341 days ago | Side: Capitalism
warrior(1372) Disputed
1 point  

oh you mean like the ussr did when they invaded Afghanistan and imprisoned there own people in Siberian prison camps and what about pol-pot remember that genocidal ass hole and Che Guevara killed over 100 gays, intellectuals, capitalists, and religious leaders each the Nazis only killed over 60000 people communists have killed over 100,0000 over the years conclustion commies are even worse than Nazis

341 days ago | Side: Capitalism
0 points

Please explain how a classless society in which the working class control the means of production violate human rights.

411 days ago | Side: Communism
1 point  

Communist manifisto has three parts, revolt of the proletariat, dictatorship of the proletariat, then finally pure communism. the first two steps are very violent actions cause to create turmoil and destory the merhcants of our society, followed by a totalitarian state of controle of the proletariat by a dictator, does not sound very fun imho, and finally, pure communism, whith btw has never been reached where we all share these "fruits" of the labor we produce. communism is an ideal that cant be reached. capitalism has many faults, but i would rather live by the ideals of freedom of cosummerism and the "invisable hand" that also allows finacial freedom then the directed unfree stages of communism.

411 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

, .

411 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

Capitalism is better. Communism enslaves each individual to the community. Capitalism allows each individual to be free and independent.

Communism never makes progress because individuals are not given a just reward for improving things, while capitalism constantly improves. Communism lacks the economic freedom of choice to the fullest extent possible, in Capitalism people are free to choose what they want. Communism gives the lazy as much as the hard working, while capitalism allows each individual to sell their labor, creating a result where the hardest working are rewarded in accordance to how hard they work. In capitalism each person is independent, in communism each person is interdependent, interdependence is a form of slavery. In communism people work where the central Government tells them to, while in capitalism they work where they want.

400 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

Is it just me or did you copy down everything steve said?????????

399 days ago | Side: Communism
1 point  

Capitalism has been proven to work farther better than communism. In communism an individual cannot be motivated to work because they will recieve the same amount of money and medical care if they did the minimum amount of work. No matter what field you're in, in a communist system, all people recieve the same amount of money no matter what.

Capitalism increases the amount of money for the amount of work you do for that specific job(whether it be in education or labor).

397 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

They are both bad, Communism enslaves and the Capitalist mess things up. US is democratic and it is not Capitalism or communism but capitalism vs Socialism. US us in between both, i side with my country.

381 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

There's one simple reason communism can't work, simple human nature. Humans, like all animals, seek to amass influence and resources for themselves and no matter what system we use, someone will always use their postition to acquire them, the difference is that under capitalism, it's the businessmen, under communism, it's the government. People will always do this and changes the system will only change who succeeds and how.

381 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

communisam may be the poler oppiit to facisam in pollitical theroy but in practice its the exact same thing one man controlls every thing and if you speek out agenst the state your anre exicuted for treeson capitalisam requires a free society inorder to funtion whereas comunisam requires a totalitarin nanie state use your head communisam = the destruction of freedom how can you possiblly support that

342 days ago | Side: Capitalism
sarowiwa(9) Disputed
1 point  

One man controls everything??????? Executed for treason?????? Destruction of freedom???????? Try and read Marx.

338 days ago | Side: Communism
1 point  

i love how all the capitalists are actually presenting actual arguments backed up by historical facts and the commies arguments are just the equivalent of "no i right i win"

341 days ago | Side: Capitalism
warrior(1372) Clarified
1 point  

i mean seriously how are these delusional dumb fucks actually winning it makes no logical sence there are more arguments from our side and ours make actual sense

341 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

what i chose the capitalist side why dose it keep saying side:communism on my comments i don't get it

341 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

what the "communist" supporters are probably thinking of is socialism you can have a free democratic and pluralistic society with a socialist economy how ever that would be extremely difficult to maintain that is why most socialist society's turn to communism which as history has shown us repeatedly is oppressive, totalitarian, and highly unstable and virtually unsustainable

340 days ago | Side: Capitalism
1 point  

WOW128 to 141? peaple on the internet are frecken dilutionel

340 days ago | Side: Capitalism
0 points

Capitalism is better. I and everyone should be selfish. I would 100% rather buy that new BMW than give money to poor people. Call me evil I dont care. It's just how people should think.

411 days ago | Side: Capitalism
0 points

I have four things to say: -You are selfish and moronic

-You could just be trolling/spamming

-That side of capitalism works for the Bourgeoisie, you can never agree on your own post unless you are a Bourgeois.

- In communism you don't have to give to the poor, that just happens in the system.

407 days ago | Side: Communism
4 points

Communism is the perfect form of Government as everyone is equal. there is no working class or middle class. Everyone gains an equal share of everything money food and housing, which would end poverty.

However there is too many people in this world, who only care about themselves and how much money they have compared to the next one idiot, like it is some kind of game, of who has the most wins. of which the winner hopes for power, which only corrupts and changes peoples opinion of you for the worst, no matter what they say. Because they are jealous of you want your position and wealth.

391 days ago | Side: Communism
warrior(1372) Disputed
2 points

then no one has any insentive what so ever to get there lazey asses out of bed echmorning exept for the secret polieses boot on there door ready at any moment to kick it down and haul them of to a labor camp if they dont do there "patrieotic duty" so everyoe is motivated by fear insted of ambition and that is no way to live

342 days ago | Side: Capitalism
Revolt(200) Disputed
2 points

"Everyone gains an equal share of everything money food and housing, which would end poverty."

I wonder why so many people in the defunct USSR starved to death, if not for poverty.

158 days ago | Side: Capitalism

For a classless, stateless society where people work for society and themselves. Where if you contribute to the collective good you will get your share and if you don't you went get anything because you don't deserve the product of labor from the collective good. And no more wars over land because there won't be anymore borders. The objective of communism is the freedom of the individual. And the proletariat shall be free from exploitation. And kids won't die for pointless reasons which is mostly poverty-related. Where everyone will rule as one. Kind of like Democracy but safer and more secure.

420 days ago | Side: Communism
casper3912(1550) Disputed
4 points

From each according to ability, to each according to need(not ability).

It is always good to see young comrades, especially ones that are mostly correct in their understanding.

I envision communism like a large scale open source community, or gift economy, or even resource based economy.

416 days ago | Side: Capitalism
steve789(159) Disputed
2 points

Greed is not created by competition, it is created by want, stateless communism dissolves as soon as individuals realize they can trade their own product for a profit to purchase their desires. There is nothing wrong with that, so they would have no guilt in it, and therefor not refrain from it. The same thing would divide the income of labor as soon as individuals realized the value of their labor. Added kids in America have plenty of access to food. Even in pure capitalism, a kid still has an opportunity to work for their food...so they would be able to avoid dying at the hands of their worthless parents.

420 days ago | Side: Capitalism
Coldfire(598) Disputed
5 points

Yes, greed is created by want. A want for more than one needs in order to survive.

Competition is created out of a combination of scarcity in resources and the individual will to survive when dependant on those resources. Profit requires scarcity in order to have value. When scarcity (instead of abundance) is promoted and even encouraged in a profit based system such as capitalism, it becomes flawed and unsustainable.

Without scarcity, capitalism could not exist as there would be no profit. Capitalism requires scarcity, requires there to be an amount of resources that cannot equally support the entire population. It's like a game of musical chairs, only benefitting the "winners" while at the same time actually creating the unavoidable loss of the losers.

419 days ago | Side: Communism
bananawalrus(3) Disputed
2 points

"And kids won't die for pointless reasons which is mostly poverty-related." Explain why men women and children are starving in north korea, explain the deaths of the refugees who to tried to cross the border due to hunger, explain why the US had to donate large sums of money for food to provide for the north korean people.

413 days ago | Side: Capitalism
4 points

Saying that is like trying to compare an apple with an orange, N. Korea is not communist.

413 days ago | Side: Communism
obama12(4) Disputed
3 points

Norht Korea... communist government?.... lololololololololol do you know what communism actualy is or are you blinded by the media?

347 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

Communism is an ideology that is separated by several theories and practices (Marxism, Stalinism, Maoism, Trotskyism, Leninism, etc..). On the one hand, their theories have failed because of corruption Stalinist, but after the fall of the Soviet Union, communism has been changing gradually to become a democratic ideology. There are many countries such as Nepal, Cyprus, Uruguay, Vietnam, are ruled by communist parties, but with the democratic system and a Marxist. In my opinion, communism is currently dominating capitalism because communism advocates the working class, while capitalism, unfortunately defends the bourgeoisie.

419 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

The reason I support communism, is not by beauty is by the side communism defend. Most people prefer capitalism even because of money and feel freedom. For me money is bullshit. Money enslaves society. There are thousands of people in Africa who are starving, not only because of armed conflict but also because there is support in the economy of these countries. And I also think that capitalism works like a mafia!

416 days ago | Side: Communism
warrior(1372) Disputed
1 point  

ur right we shuld just do awat with money all together then insted of stors we can just have big ware houses where peaple go and fight echother over all the free shit itll be like black frieday all year wouldent that just be wounder full of we can just have the government give us every thing then we could all expereince the great joy of wateing in line for houers at a thime for a single slice of bread yaeh that sounds like utopia dosest it

342 days ago | Side: Capitalism
warrior(1372) Clarified
1 point  

i am not supporting the commies i am being sarcastic i am a starch Conservative capitalist

341 days ago | Side: Capitalism
bananawalrus(3) Disputed
-1 points

Money enslaves society? More like communism enslaves society. Where do you think communist countries get support from? don't they use money to gain resources? capitalism works like a mafia???? support your claim.

413 days ago | Side: Capitalism
Coldfire(598) Disputed
2 points

Money enslaves society?

Yes.

"Slavery is but the owning of labor and carries with it the care of the laborers. While the European plan… Is that capital shall control labor by controlling the wages. This can be done by controlling the money.

It will not due to allow the greenback (the debt free currency suggested by president Lincoln) as we cannot control that." - The hazzard circular. July 1862.

"None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free." - Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

More like communism enslaves society.

How so?

Where do you think communist countries get support from? don't they use money to gain resources?

They get support from everybody working to benefit the whole instead of everyone competing to survive.

Essentially, communism doesn't need money in order to function. It just requires different incentives.

412 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

I would like to know what communist countries are there, after all you did say they exist. Capitalism supports The Bourgeoisie because it allows the surplus value to go to them, not The Proletariat.

412 days ago | Side: Communism
anarchyguy(12) Disputed
2 points

If money does not enslave the society, then why do people have to pay the rents? How many people have committed suicide because they could not pay the rents and debts? The money actually served to exchange not to enslave the people. Do not you think that money makes people become greedy? Why there is gangs wars and mafia wars? It is because they are different groups? No! ... It is because of money! Look at the third world countries and you're think why there hunger. And also you have to think why I say that capitalism looks like a mafia.

412 days ago | Side: Communism
warrior(1372) Disputed
2 points

your right then we can just steel shit from gient where houses and fight echother for them like black friyday evry day or have the government give us all our shit so we can all enjoy the plesuire of wating in line for houres for a single slice of bred that sounds like utopia right?

341 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

The way communism was meant to be, where everyone is equal, and not one group that's a bit more equal than another. Capitalism encourages greed and selfishness. However, I think a resource-based economy would be much better than capitalism or communism.

385 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

I think that we should have peaceful revolution like Gandhi did to win his country's independence from UK. And then, we should have a neo-communist government that take wealth from 1% and redistrubed to 99% while keeping the freedom and equality of 99%.

381 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

Communism? It's a good idea, unfortunately when it was first introduced, people like Lenin introduced it wrongly, hence its bad reputation! Also, far too many people have far too much to loose. It would never work, mankind's nature wouldn't allow it.

360 days ago | Side: Communism
2 points

None of them works. What we need is a new system. The capitalism is too much individual and always will have someone there winning and all the other losing or even dying. Communism doesn't works too. A new system maybe works, but we have to have people that understand about it, but the poor part of the population is a problem...

345 days ago | Side: Communism
1 point  

communism is ideal in theory but in practice it is extremely difficult to perform, yet i believe that with slow modifications it can be performed easily

347 days ago | Side: Communism
1 point  

I support communism because in a communistic system every person is worth the same.

140 days ago | Side: Communism
1 point  

i say we should we have to pick communism is more a type of goverment and capitalism is an economic setup

you could in theory have both

101 days ago | Side: Communism

m .

415 days ago | Side: Communism

, .

415 days ago | Side: Communism
canteenkenny(61) Disputed
3 points

Is this creating false points for your side of the argument?

415 days ago | Side: Capitalism
2 points

Nope I was testing a glitch and to make for it I will make it on the other side.

411 days ago | Side: Communism
Popular Debates in World: Are ghosts real or fake? Would you rather live forever or die today? Do Numbers Exist?



About CreateDebate
The CreateDebate Blog
Take a Tour
Help/FAQ
Newsletter Archive
Sharing Tools
Invite Your Friends
Bookmarklets
Partner Buttons
RSS & XML Feeds
Reach Out
Advertise
Contact Us
Report Abuse
Twitter
Basic Stuff
User Agreement
Privacy Policy
Sitemap
Creative Commons



©2013 TidyLife, Inc. All Rights Reserved. User content, unless source quoted, licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Debate Forum | Big shout-outs to The Bloggess and Andy Cohen.