CreateDebate


Debate Info

95
92
Good Bad
Debate Score:187
Arguments:119
Total Votes:211
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Good (59)
 
 Bad (60)

Debate Creator

supremepizza(1412) pic



Communism: Good or Bad?

Good

Side Score: 95
VS.

Bad

Side Score: 92
4 points

How can a stateless, peaceful, classless, resource abundant society be bad ?

| Side: Good

I can agree except capitalist.-------------------------------------

| Side: Bad
casper3912(1560) Disputed
2 points

Capitalism requires a violence monopoly to protect its property, and thus a state is necessary to capitalism. Capitalism is dependent on the price mechanism, which is dependent on scarcity and not abundance. Supply is artificially kept low or less efficient alternatives are pursued to boost revenue in some industries, for example a light bulb that never needed replacing would not be good for sales and thus it won't be pursued. The search for cheaper labor and access to resources leads naturally to war. If not for the democratic nature of most of our government and some key technological advancements we would likely still be enslaving Africans because of capitalism.

| Side: Good
2 points

Its a fine idea but the reality is impossible. I personally would not be happy in it even if it worked out perfectly. I happen to like the idea personal responsibility and in a system like communism and in socialism it is to easy to blame someone els for your problems and consequently not be able to change your own fate.

| Side: Bad
casper3912(1560) Disputed
1 point

Do you know what communism is?

Judging by your reply it seems you don't.

The so called "communist states" were/are very far removed from what communism actually is.

Communism is more or less when everyone has capital, and that means that individuals are more independent and thus truly more responsible for themselves.

| Side: Good
Liber(1718) Disputed
2 points

Whatever has given you the idea that a Communist society would be resource abundant?

| Side: Bad
casper3912(1560) Disputed
0 points

The same thing that tells me triangles have 3 sides and 180 degrees, and thus all the trig rules(with enough anaylisis time)... The definition.

| Side: Good
henrylowe(2) Disputed
1 point

How can a stateless, peaceful, classless, resource abundant society be bad ?

Usually I'm not so blunt but when everybody is making the same amount of money it doesnt work. in every society you have gods and you have cogs. The gods work hard to make their money so they can relax later in life. But the cogs slack off and are now outraged that they dont have nice things. But society needs the cogs so we can have people do the jobs nobody wants to do, such as taking the garbage, or sorting the recycling. Besides, name one good communism.

| Side: Bad
casper3912(1560) Disputed
2 points

Money doesn't exist in a communist society. Money comes from not owning your own capital that you need to survive or to enjoy luxuries, when you own capital money becomes obsolete.

Band societies, all they need is the right tech and their modern instead of primitive communism.

| Side: Good
Troy8(2254) Disputed
1 point

Very easily, that's how.

| Side: Bad

Okay, so before you call me a 'commie bastard' hear me out.

Communism in theory is actually a great idea; everyone is equal and everyone shares the same stuff. Unfortunately when attempted to be put into practice every single attempt has failed and instead ended up as a Dictatorship. A Dictatorship is when one person has absolute power over a country (Stalin, for example), this is the complete opposite of Communism.

So if you think communism involves having one person that controls the country you are wrong, as such if you think the U.S.S.R (now Russia, no longer a Dictatorship), China, Libya (formally), or North Korea are country's of communism you are an ignorant fuck tard most likely lead to believe this through stupid Western Propaganda.

In saying this though, I still prefer living in Australia with my greedy capitalist life ;)

| Side: Good
Troy8(2254) Disputed
5 points

Communism in theory is actually a great idea; everyone is equal and everyone shares the same stuff

How is this a good thing? All this does is provoke laziness and take motivation out of working, learning, and just about anything that is currently competitive.

Unfortunately when attempted to be put into practice every single attempt has failed and instead ended up as a Dictatorship. A Dictatorship is when one person has absolute power over a country (Stalin, for example), this is the complete opposite of Communism.

Exactly, it is nothing but an ideal. That's why it is only harmful to try it.

In saying this though, I still prefer living in Australia with my greedy capitalist life ;)

You really had me there. But still, I can't imagine why anyone likes the concept of communism. One of the main goals in life is to make more money than other people and enjoy a nice life. With this wiped out, what incentive is there to get up off the couch if someone else is doing work, yet still is equal and and has equal possessions?

| Side: Bad
casper3912(1560) Disputed
3 points

Do you honestly believe that people only preform valuable work because of coercion?

| Side: Good
garry77777(1794) Disputed
2 points

"How is this a good thing?"

Well it eliminates the crippling poverty, and hardship so many have to endure, im not suprise you have no conception of what that means

"and just about anything that is currently competitive."

I agree that some mechanism to promote competition is essential.

"One of the main goals in life is to make more money than other people "

Really thats what you think your main goal in life is, i pity you.

| Side: Good
ThomasT(1) Disputed
3 points

Communism in theory is actually a great idea; everyone is equal and everyone shares the same stuff.

Actually, it's not a great idea even in theory. Some of us might find this idea attractive, but some of us don't. If you want to implement such idea, you must use force and therefore you inevitably need a violent revolution.

The problem lies in the core idea of equality. Communism is not about equal rules for everybody - in fact, it needs some authority to distribute the wealth among all citizens and the members of such authority has different rights than others.

Communism is about the equality of results, which is, at least for mankind, a nonsense. Some of us do wish to work 16 hours per day, some of do want to take risks and to create something significant. But not for the purpose of sharing between all of us, but for our self-interest, for our family etc. If you forbid the reason, the interest, you kill the incentive.

| Side: Bad
2 points

If you want to implement such idea, you must use force and therefore you inevitably need a violent revolution.

No, just no. Communism is embraced by so many third world countries because they want a better quality of life, so the majority WANT it. Unfortunately it turns out to be the opposite of communism and they get screwed over.

| Side: Good
casper3912(1560) Disputed
1 point

Actually, you may not have to use force but if you do it would only be because of vested interests in an outdated system. Also, force isn't neccassirly bad, the american revolution was forceful and was most independence movements; certainly not having britain control the world is a good thing eh?

Actually communism is decentralized, what you are refering to is a particular type of socialism which typically results in failure.

Your definitions are those of the cold war propaganda, and both sides of the alantic were lying to their citizens.

| Side: Good
casper3912(1560) Disputed
1 point

Your description is immature, its not that everyone shares the same stuff but rather that everyone has access/ownership of capital.

You can blame Leninism for the failed so called "communist states".

At least you know that the "communist states" are not communist societies, good :) Tis brings hope to me.

as for being a commie bastard, that would be me.

| Side: Bad

I don't think immature would be the correct word; perhaps lazy would be ;)

I was just about to finish my break at work so I was rushing through things.

| Side: Good
2 points

I take the view that it is wrong question "good" or "bad". Every political system has advantages and disadvantages. More over the wealth of nation depends more on rulers (government) and on their purposes than on the political system. For example now I live in "democratic country" but if to think critically and answer several questions such as 'What rights do i have' it becomes obvious that our system has nothing in common with Democracy. So, I should say that system gives only ways to rule and politicians decide what kinds of result we should get.

| Side: Good

I would say that communism as an ideal, and the emotions behind it, are good. However, not one country has been able to make it work, as man is a creature of habit. That habit is messing up. However, in theory it is a brilliant idea. Make sure everybody has enough. Share the wealth. Still, doubt it would ever work in my lifetime.

| Side: theoretically good
2 points

Communism rocks.

People, though, suck.

When you mix the two together, you have to have people who suck the least.

If you don't, the communism will suck just as much as the people who suck.

But then of course, by then, it's not communism. It's something that sucks.

History shows us these things. If the memory of the Soviets wasn't still fresh in the Western mind, maybe we'd actually be able to move towards what communism was meant to be, but unfortunately, this is not so.

| Side: Good
2 points

I don't know too much about things like this in general. But from the little information I've gathered I see no harm in it.

But if you're more educated than me, feel free to tell me otherwise. :)

| Side: Good

Its theoretically good but its never really been done 100%.

| Side: theoretically good

If you are a commie, China and Cuba are communist, go see if they will take you. Then, you can live miserably along with them.

| Side: Bad
casper3912(1560) Disputed
1 point

They are communist in name only, a quick reading of the communist manifesto should make this clear, especially if you have read other works of Marx as well.

| Side: Bad
1 point

I have read Communist Manifesto. Now, you should read POWER AND MARKET by Rothbard.

| Side: Bad
garry77777(1794) Disputed
1 point

"China and Cuba are communist, go see if they will take you. Then, you can live miserably along with them."

I feel compelled to tell you that most Cubans are much better off today than they were when cuba was a private bordello for corrupt gangster US capitalists.

Cuba has a better health care system than the US, its education system is on avergae of a higher standard also, the death rate is less, they life expectancy is higher, education is free all the way up the ladder while in the US is free (and absolutely terrible unless private), then 3rd level is of high quality as only the rich or those willing to accept crippling debt can afford it.

I could type here all day about the advabtages of lving in Cuba to the US, they are a model of sustainability, they are shining light on the 3rd world who want to extricate themselves from this crippling capitalist system that has kept their people in bondage.

You seapk of Cuba with what seems like severe cold war induced paranoia.

| Side: Bad
1 point

Cuba is not a bad place for you info...............many communists are from Cuba for example, me. Those are only communist in name.

| Side: Bad
1 point

Theoretically nearly every governement would work given the proper circumstances, for the good of the majority.

Unfortunately human nature makes it so only a handful work in practice. Communism apparently not being one of them. Capitalism is actually young so let's not get too confident in this experiment either. It appears perhaps capitalism is a catalyst to "buy" democracy instead of taking it over with weapons and blood the traditional way these things fall apart.

| Side: theoretically good
Assface(400) Disputed
1 point

Theoretically, every political system would work given the proper circumstances. In reality, none of them does. In political theory, the goal is often not pragmatism, but rectitude. And the one philosophy that comes closest to that is laissez-faire capitalism.

| Side: Bad
iamdavidh(4850) Disputed
2 points

laissez-faire capialism is a silly notion. We wouldn't have roads, cops, or a military. You'd have a few people with everything who use all this money and power to make sure no one else can get any of that money or power. If a steve jobs invents Iphone in laissez-faire capitalism, someone with more money just steels it, copies it and puts him out of business.

There needs to be a way for people to protect their ideas, there needs to be a way to ensure people who make food do it in a safe manner, there needs to be programs in place for injured, old and sick, there needs to be fair rules against monopolies, rules on how investors can use other people's money, etc. There needs to be oversite and control over money. Money is a tool and letting it do whatever it will do is no different than a laissez-faire military for instance, where each individual general say could do whatever they like with all their missiles and guns.

Do you honestly believe that people left to their own devices, given all of this power, would actually use it altruistically? You need checks and balances on everything which has power, and this includes money, which is the heart of capitalism. Capitalism itself needs checks and balances.

Regular people need to have as much power and representation as those with everything. Otherwise you are inviting a type of capitalist monarchy whilst everyone else is forever stuck in a state of practical surfdom without hope of escape no matter how smart or talented they happen to be.

It's amazing that despite every single time in history we take a laissez-faire attitude toward capitalism it results in disaster, yet people still defend it.

| Side: theoretically good
1 point

I was on born in modern democratic Kazakhstan. However Kazakhstan took its independence only 20 years ago. Once, I needed to go to the shop and stopped the car. While driving I was talking with the driver he was a Candidate of Science in the field of History. I have asked him a question about the past years, and what he thought about communism, and did he live better during those times. The "driver" told me "Oh, those good old days are gone, but I still remember how good it was during the Soviet period. Yes, there were long lines for food products, and yes there was always some lack of clothes, car parts. But the mentality of people was different. People were not only running for material values. It was safe to walk in the street at any time. The development of science and technology was on the highest levels." He convinced me that the life was somehow better and I believe in that. Some people have lost their moral values while getting the physical ones.

| Side: Good
1 point

I was on born in modern democratic Kazakhstan. However Kazakhstan took its independence only 20 years ago. Once, I needed to go to the shop and stopped the car. While driving I was talking with the driver he was a Candidate of Science in the field of History. I have asked him a question about the past years, and what he thought about communism, and did he live better during those times. The "driver" told me "Oh, those good old days are gone, but I still remember how good it was during the Soviet period. Yes, there were long lines for food products, and yes there was always some lack of clothes, car parts. But the mentality of people was different. People were not only running for material values. It was safe to walk in the street at any time. The development of science and technology was on the highest levels." He convinced me that the life was somehow better and I believe in that. Some people have lost their moral values while getting the physical ones.

| Side: Good
1 point

depends on what you mean by good or bad? lol lol lol lol lol olo lol ololo lo lo o

| Side: Good
1 point

What makes you think America isn't headed towards communism? How much money do we owe China? How many jobs do we outsource to communist countries? Communism without a fascist dictator looks good to me- only it's never been applied that way.

| Side: Good
1 point

You should try to be communist, even if you don't quite get there. If you fail to reach your goal but get halfway it's better than not getting anywhere at all. The theory of communism is good, nobody can deny the fact that equality (of opportunity, rather than outcome maybe) is good, it's fair and it's right, nobody should be penalized because they were born into a poor family right? Studies and tests have proven that people are happier if people are more equal, in Switzerland for example, they have a huge welfare state and they are they happiest country in the world! Happiness should be a goal in life, not making money and equality (which is essentially what Communism fights for) brings happiness :)

| Side: Good
2 points

I absolutely agree with you.

Communism as the theory is right and good. But most of attempts to establish communism has failed.

I am actually a communist, and I think, that one day, people wont be so selfish and greedy, and REAL and FREE DEMOCRATIC COMMUNISM will have an open way.

Make love, not war and peace to everybody.

PS: I am so happy that even in UK or US is somebody with similar opinions as me.

Sorry for my ENG, I am from Central Europe ;)

| Side: Good
1 point

Communism is good, but we will never achive it because of greed.

| Side: Good
1 point

That is a really old argument. If we live in a society based on helping we would be humanitarian. greed won't affect anyone any way.

| Side: Bad

Communism is in general good its just that it has faile din practise mant times so people are prejediced against it... also it over looks human nature

| Side: Good

Whether its a good idea or not is irrelevant if it cant work. It cant work because some people, and some people at different points in their live, are selfish greedy humans and ruin it for everyone els. A better system than communism is one where everyone takes care of themselves but have the choice to help others if they want and that isn't Communism, socialism, or fascism or whatever its Capitalism. Democracy and true capitalism works the best of any system I can think of despite what the occupy people say.

| Side: Bad
casper3912(1560) Disputed
2 points

Communism, like capitalism and feudalism before it, depends on key means of production being in operation. It is this base of society, these modes of production, which produce the superstructure or political, social, cultural, sociological, ect make up of society. The problem with Leninism is that it is incapable of developing these modes of production within a necessarily small time frame, good thing Leninism is not communism. Communism is fully capable of working once the economic base of society develops out of capitalism, till then capitalism regulated by a democratic government is the best system.

| Side: Good
garry77777(1794) Disputed
1 point

"A better system than communism is one where everyone takes care of themselves but have the choice to help others if they want"

Isn't that more or less what we have now?

"or fascism or whatever its Capitalism"

Actually the USA is not as far from facism as you think, if you don't agree then its likely you don't fully understand how facism could take root, i strongly urge you to wathc the following video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gLDzDklTRU

"Democracy and true capitalism works the best of any system I can think of despite what the occupy people say"

How can you say that about a system that causes so much destruction and death around the world, about a system that keeps the majorioty poor even the countries that have used it more successfully than any others i.e. the US

| Side: Good
1 point

It is more or less what we have now although we are slowly loosing our freedom to choose who we help and more and more the government is deciding that for us (socialism). I don't disagree with you that the US is also leaning towards fascism but it is more complicated then that.

A common belief among liberals is that the US is tuning fascist because of corporations but I think it is the governments fault and the best way to fix it is through it.

Every system has its faults there called humans, capitalism has caused less death and destruction than other systems and the poor in a capitalistic system like the USs have more wealth and necessity's than most of the world combined.

| Side: Bad
3 points

I'm for fair capitalism. Socialism is great idea, all people are equal and have same rights, but usually it ends up, as somebody mentioned, with dictatorship and repressions, so basically true socialism is some kind of utopia. As all people are different, some of us tend to be more successful because of hard-working and self-improvement, while other part prefer to not to work at all. So how both of them can be equal?

| Side: Bad
casper3912(1560) Disputed
4 points

Your assumptions are showing.

Leninist socialism does typically result in dictatorship, but that is not all socialism.

Some people don't work hard and are rich, so people work hard and are poor. Actually, most people that work hard are poor. Your making the assumption that everyone has opportunity, and they don't.

The practical elimination of scarcity is coming, at which point people may actually have opportunity.

| Side: Good
3 points

The bad parts of the bastardized versions of Communism out there are wrong and will never be what Karl Marx called "Utopia for the Common Man"

| Side: Bad
3 points

Communism doesn't respect individualism... i hate it. why? it's pretty simple. in communism,1st,u must do everything ur leader said, (eventho u know it's wrong), 2nd, economic sytem is mainly dominated by the goverment (u can do nothing 'bout it, n who knows that the goverment will corrupt some money), 3rd, if u dispute the goverment, u may get killed in an instant (eventho ur rebuttal is true) coz the leader is a dictator, 4th, in communism, it's said that u share the 'same things', so eventho we work hard, we'll only get the same thing like the poor will... it's so unfair n i think there are still a lot of shortcomings of communism

| Side: Bad
2 points

u must do everything ur leader said

There is no leader in Communism, that is called a dictatorship or socialism. There has never been a true display of communism in recorded history.

we'll only get the same thing like the poor will

There are no poor in Communism

| Side: Good
casper3912(1560) Disputed
1 point

Actually communism has true individualism as its basis. It further advances the practicality and realism of :

"Life: everyone is entitled to live once they are created.

Liberty: everyone is entitled to do anything they want to so long as it doesn't conflict with the first right.

Estate: everyone is entitled to own all they create or gain through gift or trade so long as it doesn't conflict with the first two rights." - wikipedia

Communism is a stateless classless society, don't confuse it with lenin's failed socialism.

| Side: Good
Troy8(2254) Disputed
2 points

You forgot to mention the part about how individuals do not have to perform work in order to receive anything.

| Side: Bad
2 points

BAD. Communism - is when everyone should do the decisions of the leader. This is a society on the type of army. This lack of economic freedom of the citizen. It's blunt the primitive operation.

USSR is good example.

| Side: Bad
casper3912(1560) Disputed
2 points

The ussr was never communist. It was soviet at one point then degenerated, but it was never communist. For much of its existence it wasn't even socialism, since socialism is worker's control and that was clearly lacking.

| Side: Good
2 points

After the Marxism had influenced the capitalism and Imperialism states, in 1917 the people of Russia made their choice – taking the path of the Revolution, the state transformed from a monarchy to socialist republic. This is when communism came into use for the first time in a country and the main ideas of the movement were applied.

It is true that liberty is precious; so precious that it must be carefully rationed.

Vladimir Lenin

LOL

"How do you tell a communist? Well, it's someone who reads Marx and Lenin. And how do you tell an anti-Communist? It's someone who understands Marx and Lenin."

Ronald Regan

"Communism doesn't work because people like to own stuff."

–Frank Zappa

"Capitalism and communism stand at opposite poles. Their essential difference is this: The communist, seeing the rich man and his fine home, says: 'No man should have so much.' The capitalist, seeing the same thing, says: 'All men should have as much.' "

–Phelps Adams

"Don't listen to what the Communists say, but look at what they do."

- Nguyen Van Thieu, the President of South Vietnam.

Sorry I like quotes =)

| Side: Bad
2 points

the idea of communism is amazing but man cannot stick to the true communism views. it always ends up in mass killings or complete control by the government

| Side: Bad
1 point

As bad or WORSE than National Socialism. Communism has killed more people than NS plus ALL "religious" wars combined.

| Side: Bad
1 point

yeah even though communism has never existed as a nation it somehow killed millions. come on

| Side: Good
1 point

Morally: because those who work harder deserve more. Your hardships will never amount to the entitlement to fruits of another man's labor, no matter how desperate.

Practically: because people are driven by their desires. They want their due pay based on the effort they put forth (at least). There will always be slackers and mooches, and there will always be people who are more driven to do more because they want more. Denying those who do more their due earnings will only lead to those people doing less because there's no point, resulting in less things actually being done.

| Side: Bad
garry77777(1794) Disputed
1 point

"Your hardships will never amount to the entitlement to fruits of another man's labor, no matter how desperate."

I agree, some means of rewarding those who work harder or acheive more through greater ability is required.

"They want their due pay based on the effort they put forth (at least). "

Actually studies have found that money only increases motivation by a small amount, once people feel they are being paid adequately money has no effect on how motivated a person is, when this happens the degree of control a person has over their own work is what fuels productivity.

| Side: Good
1 point

Whether Communism may work for the United States is well, unknown, but i believe that it may work in other countries it wouldn't work here, because of the certain types of jobs we have. In a Communism Society everyone is paid equally, but i believe that to be unfair if someone is working alot harder than someone else for the same wage.

| Side: Bad
garry77777(1794) Disputed
1 point

"In a Communism Society everyone is paid equally, but i believe that to be unfair if someone is working alot harder than someone else for the same wage"

I agree thats why i feel a system based on communist and anarchist ideals could be better solution.

| Side: Good
1 point

is communism good it sounds virtuous everyone working for the benefit of society.all posesion is considered theft and we all take on the same responsibility for the world no more corporate jets for the robber barons no more stock market no more bonuses . but here is the problem ok humans have greed deal with it.if we tear down all forms of class what do you have well the thugs take over becUAse when the government or or whoever comes around wanting the weapons there will be people will say no because there is another human trait that will not work with communism fear. so the fear and greed will bread a class of thugs who will go around collecting possesions because when the fabric of our existance since the begining of time is unraveled there will be chaos because of the fear and greed and the thugs will be the oportunists and will use the new structure of government which is total control of our lives which is said to be for our benefit to rule us new and old peasants. one thing stays the same under communism poverty and class structure. there will be a aristocratic class that rises except they are in the government because that is where the money goes and because of greed and fear for their own existance the thugs will be the ones who gravitate to those posts so people will see that this new society doesnt work when the production that used to exist comes to a halt because hey whats the point of working when you dont have to u can be a recipiant of the new government give aways so there will be a resistance and the thugs which are in the government which has the weapons which the working class turned in for bread and shelter will now be turned on the workers to supress them into submission......................................................................boy doesnt that just sound utopic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! and if im wrong show me where in history that when marxism has been installed it has turned out and different then the senario i just explained

| Side: Bad
1 point

In theory, yes. Everyone is equal. It just can't work out that way. Most of the time people will be killed by the bushels because everyone wants to be different. Russia today is so paranoid that they just stay isolated until they are threaten and jump at anyone. Russia is soo poor today because nothing worked out for them. The farms just downgraded their economy and the wealthier people got angry and decided to start riots and revolts. Many people were killed in Russia, China, Vietnam, Korea, and about every communist country.

| Side: theoretically good
1 point

It doesn't matter as much what type of government you live in as what type of leaders you have. If you are democratic, you need a proper leader; if you are communist, you need a good leader (or none at all). So, in the end, there are many ways to rule a country but it is up to the leader to use the method in the right way - for the benefit of each individual. :)

| Side: Bad
1 point

I'm somewhat split on this, but I'm going with bad. Now YES communism can be seen as very good, and I do agree that it's ideology and concept are concrete, and ultimately fight for the "greater good" of humanity. However getting there is a whole different matter, as a country must go through a ridiculous amount of X factors to be able to apply communism properly. Factors such as human emotion can't be put into the calculation because they're variable and thus are inconsistent, something that communism can not be. As someone said earlier, it overlooks human nature. To teach a people how to behave in a communist world we must go back to basics. Wipe humanity clean and restart. This is evidently not a good thing. What we have seen with communism is power mad men who were once good and honest people corrupted beyond human boundaries in their search for power.

| Side: Bad


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
©2014 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.