CreateDebate


Debate Info

17
17
did did not
Debate Score:34
Arguments:36
Total Votes:35
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 did (10)
 
 did not (10)

Debate Creator

AdolfHitler(43) pic



I wanted a Socialist Germany

did

Side Score: 17
VS.

did not

Side Score: 17
1 point

And you got it .

Side: did
IllIl(27) Disputed
1 point

Sorry but he got nothing in the end. Checkmate.

Side: did not
1 point

Wanting is not achieving, yearning for is not garnering.

Understand that lazy dreams are nothing more than words whereas actions are where the real deal results come from.

Side: did
2 points

Hello Nazi,

It’s not socialism if you murdered an entire segment of society. Socialist don’t do that. Right wing authoritarians do.

excon

Side: did not
2 points

It's not socialist when you round up a large segment of your society and kill it. .........................................................

Side: did not
Amarel(3877) Disputed
3 points

It is if you see that segment of society as outsiders, and your brand of socialism is nationalistic.

Side: did
Grenache(6104) Disputed
3 points

Had it been as simple as he didn't think Jews were part of his society. But it was grander than that. From the UN:

http://www.un.org/en/holocaustremembrance/EM/partners%20materials/FAQ%20Holocaust%20EN%20Yad%20Vashem.pdf

You don't get to pick and choose which parts of society are your society and then declare your sociopolitical government based on it. If that were the case the head of the KKK could call himself both supreme ruler and a USA socialist while he burns crosses and lynches dark skinned people.

Side: did not
excon(8558) Disputed
2 points

It is if you see that segment of society as outsiders

Hello A:

BINGO...

That IS the issue, isn't it?? What you MISS is that socialists don't SEE a segmented society.. Right wing authoritarians do..

excon

Side: did not
2 points

But instead you went for a fascist, authoritarian one. Nazi Germany was as far from socialism as you can possibly get.

Side: did not
2 points

Really? Interesting that you rounded up communists and socialists and sent them to concentration camps, then.

Side: did not
1 point

A.H. wanted a NATIONALIST Germany with a "socialistic" lean of his own design. Just like the U.S.S.R. twisted socialism to their own design. A TOOL to make people THINK the "Peoples Government", the "Peoples Army", the "Peoples court", etc, belonged to "the people". The Peoples vote was controlled by the Peoples Government making it totally different from democratic socialism. Socialism is supposed to be like a collective where "the people" share the costs AND the benefits and the CONTROL .... just like our Constitution lays out. Just like it was when America WAS great!

Side: did not
Amarel(3877) Disputed
2 points

The Constitution lays out the guidelines for a minimal government with elected representatives. A socialist government requires massive intrusion into the lives of the people; a gigantic government.

Even if someone noble starts off at the helm with such power as that provided to the leaders of a socialist system, it is a short matter of time before a Mao or a Stalin ousts them and takes control. That’s one of many reasons why a full system of socialism has always lead to destruction. And it’s foolish little future serfs who always claim that socialism hasn’t been tried, leading the way to another in a long history of socialist catastrophes, which they will then claim wasn’t true socialism.

Side: did
AlofRI(1979) Clarified
1 point

Well, the Mao, Stalin, Castro socialism was a TOOL, as I said. The socialism I want is the socialism we've had since the 40's. You can't easily "take control" of a Social Democracy. Not easily I said. Trump is trying desperately right now, and that IS dangerous. As he says, "We'll see what happens." There are several descriptions of "true socialism", there's only ONE I'm interested in, and it doesn't include anyone like Stalin or Trump!

Side: did