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.
Why I'm a democratic socialist.
I believe that freedom of all belief is a right. I believe that healthcare is a right. I believe that education is a right. I support freedom of speech that is not threats, slander, libel or abuse. I believe in gender equality. I believe in racial unity. I believe in welfare for the poor and disabled. I believe that same gender marriage is none of my business. I believe in worker's rights. I believe in trade unions. I believe in limiting wars and bringing our troops home.
Re: "I support freedom of speech that is not threats, slander, libel or abuse."
That's a contradiction. You either believe in free speech, or you don't. Your constraints are too vague and arbitrary. To see it in action, all you have to do is look to college campuses nationwide and how they try to tar and feather those with conservative opinions and disrupt the rights of those who want to express and hear them.
On the rest of your screed, you just want free stuff, period. Just gimme, gimme, gimme.
You treated it like it was an either/or scenario. I was just pointing out that one can be both. You being a socialist wouldn't preclude you from being a fascist too.
Actually, it's a condition of support. No right is treated in practice as absolute, so it's illogical to think that someone must either have unqualified support for or opposition towards any right. The constraints are clear enough that they're widely practiced as exemptions to protected speech in numerous legal systems already. PC intolerance is inconsistent with the position, but the position itself is logical valid and sound.
You convientantly left out the part about these Socialistic Democrats supporting no restriction abortions of viable babies! The most important issue in this world is protecting the right of life of the innocent.
It is sickening you are such a hypocrite to say you care for all these rights, but would support a political Party that steals our right's to life!
So tell me..... of all these rights and freedoms you speak to, I missed the right to life!
You are a phoney like most people who vote for this new age Democrat Party, or parties around the world who support abortion.
You see, I agree with many of the rights and freedoms you speak to, I just happen to have the humanity to prioritise these rights.
I have the intellect to understand that the extremists who create social programs for some, on the backs of others, while stealing a baby's right to life, are total hypocrites and phonies. They lack the very compassion and humanity they want us to believe they possess.
They stand for nothing but shoving their sociaistic beliefs down everyone's throats, and making us all pay for it.
You have said you are pro life. If you vote for those who steal that baby's right to life, you are an unbelievable liar and phoney!
You are starting to show us all that you care only for getting points on this debate site and will say anything to drum up as many points as possible.
Obviously you are not only a conservative, you are a fascist communist theocrat. You believe we should only listen to ONE party, ONE party should rule and if there are any others they should keep their mouths shut if they don't believe exactly as YOU do. You believe they MUST be Christian and follow Christian ideology. You believe we should have an all conservative SCOTUS ... no other views accepted. You believe everyone who doesn't follow the conservative/Christian rule, they should not be called Americans, and should get OUT! Do you deny any of these:
Corporations are people;
Women who use birth control are sluts;
College students are slobs;
Gay Americans are an abomination;
Poor people deserve to be poor;
Union workers are lazy parasites;
Latinos are illegal until proven otherwise;
The Bible "Trumps" the Constitution;
Global warming is a hoax;
The auto industry should have gone bankrupt;
The U.S. President is a Muslim agent from Kenya;
Julian Assange is a national hero.
YOU are endangering more "after birth babies" than WE endanger the fetus because you want them to live in an authoritarian country, like Iran, Russia, N. Korea, Cuba....etc. You don't have the "intellect to understand" that extremists who think one party control with social programs for NO ONE, including the poor, are hypocrites and "lack the very compassion and humanity" they CLAIM to possess!
You hideous pathetic deceptive liar. You are just like the Democrat party that must demonize those who do not bow to your political correct big brother conditioning.
You call us racists, fascists, theocrats who want to force you to be Christians and think like we do.
YOU ARE A COMPLETE LIAR! WE ARE NONE OF THOSE THINGS! YOU ARE DESCRIBING THE LEFT TO A TEE!
The only thing Conservtives want is for you Leftist to quit forcing us to follow your dictates of how we should think. We want to protect even viable babies from your barbarism and inhumanity.
Your socialist party is everything you claim us to be. HOW CAN YOU BE SO BLIND? IS IT DEMENTIA? If so I apologise for what I'm saying to you. It's not your fault if you have old age mental issues.
O.K. Let me hear you say something GOOD about liberals. ???? Maybe another party??? Something beneficial about electing a liberal judge to the SCOTUS???? Something good about another religion???
There is a world of difference between a Democratic Socialist Party and a Communist Socialist Party. One is actually controlled by the people, the other is controlled by communist leaders and the people have no rights, no legitimate vote.
"Old age mental issues"? Well, that may happen, we can't control that. It's a shame , though, when they happen to one so young. You have my sympathies.
Do you want me to say something good about Liberals?
If it were not for the fact that Liberals want to force us all to fund their agendas through bloated Big Government agencies, I could appreciate some of their supposed compassion towards the poor.
You see if Liberals were voluntarilly giving their own money to help the poor, I would actually respect their motives.
They do not call for voluntary contributuons to help the poor. They want to force money from the working middle class to fund their over budget social programs. They do this to buy votes from those who live off our hard earned income.
It is not compassion and caring when you force others to give their money for what you consider someone's entitlement.
You want some respect from Conservatives? Try voluntarily giving your own money to free drug needles, free birth control, free college, free housing subsidies, free healthcare, etc. etc.
Pay for your own environmental agendas. Pay for your own Liberal agendas and then Conservatives will not waste their time speaking out gainst your PC Big Brother conditioning of all Americans to think like you.
I'm all for supporting safety nets to help the disabled and those who can not help themselves. I'm all for catastophic care for those who are facing emergency medical situations.
Liberals want a socialist Government whereby even able bodies people are entitled to other's hard earned money no matter the lack of work effort put forth, or the irresponsible lifestyles creating their problems over and over again.
There is no accountability in the Liberal's world. It's never anyone's fault and it is always the responsibility of the middle class to bail these people out.
You would have long ago been banned if this were my debate.
You are a phoney who could not care less about those unborn babies being killed because of the politicians you help elect.
There is no debating deceptive liars. It is a total waste of time.
When you come face to face with God, do you think he will be ok with your supporting the killing of millions of babies? Do you think he will understand how you cared more for a political ideology than a Baby's life?
You check out every sociaist politician you have supported and find out where they stand on the abortion issue. I already know the answer but you could not care less.
It's so sad there are so many phonies like you. If all the people who call themselves prolife, stood up against the pro abortion politicians, abortion (other than extreme cases) would be outlawed within a couple years.
People like you keep it legal and God knows this very well.
I see you are for workers rights. I can then only assume you are for right to work laws. After all, how can someone who supports workers rights then demand they have no right to not join a union if they so choose. At least you got one conservative view. Lets see if we can find you another!
I believe in unions simply because they are the ONLY way we can get fair treatment from greedy capitalists. I wish we didn't NEED them, but we DO, and they need money to work with, they can't fight power (money) without money and those they fight for need to invest in the protection. Those who want the benefits they fight for and don't want to pay THEIR FAIR SHARE are trying to get something for nothing, conservatives should hate them! The right to share in the profits that they create is not looking for something for nothing, it's looking to prevent slave labor, which is what we would be working for with no worker protection. You only have to look at what has happened post Reagan (the union buster), profits have soared, wages have stayed stagnant, the 1% have gotten filthy rich, and the middle class has all but disappeared! No, I may have a conservative view or two but, it AIN"T "right to work"! (Check that. I may have a "Republican view or two" ... conservative, today? NO!)
Actually, my post was for Dana. But since you responded, unions could always up the amount they charge for members to make up the difference. I see you used the words slave labor. Exactly what constitutes slave labor, in your opinion. Everyone's definition is surely different, wouldn't you think.
Obama was supposed to bring back the middle class, and he hasn't, according to you. Obama had complete control of Congress and he failed to increase wages, the rich have gotten richer, and economic growth has stagnated where 2% GDP is now deemed acceptable, which it is not.
Time to give Trump a shot and see what he can do since Obama failed on so many fronts.
"Slave labor, in this case, is forcing people to work "hard" for whatever the capitalist wants to pay them, out of the generosity of his/her heart (usually not anywhere NEAR enough to lower his/her gross income).
Slave labor is what you get when they can say, "If you want to eat, you get this much, if you don't want to eat, I'll find someone who does!" We've been through this before! When the three billionaires ran this country, they picked up "workers" on street corners that HAD to work to survive, and paid them whatever they wanted to! If that's not slave labor, I don't know what you would call it!
We still had a country after Obama, I'm hoping we still have one after Trump!
A 2% GDP is a HELL of a lot more than the last conservative admin left us, and if we had a REAL Congress, instead of a "do nothing Congress" we'd be far ahead of that! Conservative obstructionism is to blame for holding us back! Now Trump has promised an "Infrastructure Bill", something Obama has been waiting for several years! No obstruction for Putin's man! Wait'l you see Trump Care! Obama care with corrections Obama waited for, but Congress wouldn't do ... because they didn't like the name! The right wing Heritage Foundation designed it, Mit Romney used it, but Obama had NO RIGHT to steal it! (Conservative stupidity!)
It sounds like you are judging Bush solely on his last year in office. Here are the facts. Bush had an average GDP of 2.10% and Obama will end up around 1.45 to 1.50 when the final numbers are in. The CBO is saying we will never achieve 3% again. One thing is certain, it would never have happened under a Hillary presidency, as she was going to continue Obama's policies. At least Trump has fresh ideas, hopefully he can turn this around and achieve solid GDP for eight years. Anyway you slice it, Bush and Obama did not get maximum results for the economy.
Obama will leave office as the 4th worst president in terms of GDP, behind only Hoover, Johnson and Teddy Roosevelt.
What if Bush had 7 years of negative growth and his final year was positive 5%. Would you be calling him one of the greatest presidents of all time? I think not. A president has to be judged by his entire time in office, not just cherry pick one year.
"Obama had complete control of Congress and he failed to increase wages." For the two years he had control there were a "few" things that took up his time. During that time there were few jobs that could pay higher wages, they were too busy trying to stay open due to the mess Dubya left us with! Not to mention two wars Dubya started. He could have let the auto industry go bankrupt like Mitt wanted, but no, he saved those thousands of good paying jobs. He also had to honor Dubya's treaty with Iraq ... to pull out troops by a certain date! He had to do everything under the conservative blockade arranged while he was being sworn in! Do you think THEY would have passed a bill to raise wages??
He had the longest period of job growth in history. Trump is taking over with the wind at his back as far as employment and the economy is concerned! Economic growth would have been MUCH higher if Dubya hadn't sold so much technology, and the jobs that went with it, to China to pay for HIS wars so he could say "I didn't raise taxes!" (So we pay back our "loan" with our economic "stagnation", while China grows with OUR jobs!)
I HAVE to give Trump a shot, not by choice, and not to the mouth where I'd like to! Two years (or sooner) from now I believe you'll eat your words .... or say "I didn't vote for him!" By the way, shortly after his "takeover", I think he'll be a "figurehead President", the country will be run by the politicians around him and the billionaires that bought the country ... The Koch's and others! Then you'll understand the meaning of "slave labor", the reason for regulations, the consequences of Climate Change, and the reason 4,000,000 Americans didn't vote for him!
So you were against the war in Afghanistan? Just how many lives needed to be lost before you would have favored it. One million, 10 million, 100 million? I guess 3000 wasn't enough to justify running the Taliban out of ruling Afghanistan. Please give me a number before you would have intervened. Or how many more terrorist attacks needed to happen before you would approve of overthrowing the Taliban government. You did say he started two wars, so you believe both were unnecessary.
Trump is taking over an economy that is barely moving along, don't kid yourself. Maybe we should put thousands of more regulations out there to continue to stifle economic growth. You seem to like that. Any economist will tell you that more regulations hamper growth. You could argue that some harm the environment, but name me one regulation that creates and improves job growth. I can't, so be my guest.
Obama did a great job of bringing those jobs back, now didn't he. I am being sarcastic.
The Earth has gone through four cooling and warming cycles in the past 150 years. By the year 2100 we will have gone back through another cooling period, it is inevitable. At some point scientists will be worrying about ways to warm the Earth, just like they did in the 1970s.
NO! I never said I was against the war in Afghanistan. That was legitimate. I WAS against the war in Iraq, that was just Dubya showing his father how HE thought it should be done. I was against his stupidity holding back the 10th Mountain Division and letting the Iraqi's go into the caves of Tora Bora and search for bin Laden! That was also to keep casualties down, which Americans at that time objected strongly to.
Trump is taking over an economy with a slow HEALTHY growth. Faster would raise inflation and you can't "create new jobs" FAST! The good jobs were GIVEN away so China would finance his wars! Those jobs are NOT coming back, we don't even have the skills any more because the skilled ones have retired and left us with a bunch of tweeters and gamers! Many don't even KNOW how to work!
You should be proud. YOU know more than 97% of the scientists .... because you've been tutored by FOX News (?), and those great brains ... Rush Limbaugh, Glen Beck and Sarah Palin ... brilliant! (Oh, I forgot Hannity!)
You mean like scientists Dr. Richard Tol, Dr. Craig Idso, Dr. Nir Shaviv, and Dr. Nicola Scafetta who all proclaim that they were misrepresented by Cook and should not have been included in that 97% group. You can bet your ass there are many more scientists like these four who believe they were misinterpreted. That study was so off base that it can be easily tossed out as junk.
The list is indeed a good one and what most people and countries should be aiming for , only one thing when you say freedom of speech it seems to me you're imposing limits , someone is always waiting to cry slander or claim something said is offensive to them personally ; if you're offended by something someone says so what it's merely your reaction .
If you think that all countries should aim for this system, then you oppose the idea of countries in the first place and should say you are a.globalist socialist.
I said ....all people and countries ..... you rather bizzarely claim I oppose the idea of countries ( and people by implication ) and then tell me what I should label myself politically ... strange indeed
If there are no weak countries to prey on both politically and economically, then the strong nations lose any excellence or safety that they currently possess.
This means that the rich in the weak nations lose all their power and the poor in the strong nations will be the EVERYONE in the world. Everyone will be semi starving and noone will be productive.
So only the strong survive by preying on others , so the strongest nation will naturally dominate which would lead to where we rely on one worldwide system where those in charge yielding total power over the rest of us .... sounds like communism
Yes, I was highlighting what your system would be.
Unfortunately for you, that system will again devolve into countries as the region's closer to the Capital will prosper so on and so forth. You must understand something; as long as there is democracy, there cannot be true equality as any official who has power is more worried about favoring their voter-base than bringing fairness upon those who won't reelect them.
I never asked you what my system would be , I asked you two specific questions .
You're telling me your opinion on what way a system such as mine may or may not work and I suppose it's all about trying to make societies better and how to make the best of what we have .
It is indeed wishful thinking to imagine a society where everyone is equal and I don't see that changing anytime soon
I generally agree. Our only real difference is some of the things you list as rights I think are instead aspirations. For example, healthcare for all is a great aspiration, I just don't think it's automatically a human right for everyone, everywhere, every time, and every scenario.
I also am bound by realism. Not everything on the wish list for a democratic socialist society can make it into the budget, and if overloaded either through debt or tax burdens it can do more harm than good.
You are correct in the label you have chosen for yourself. Be aware that Democratic Socialism is Socialism . Further, Socialism is the path to Communism. A documented failure. Before you proudly label yourself, consider the path and the inevitable failure at its end.
Democratic Socialism is the path to the dark side. Democratic Socialism leads to Socialism. Socialism leads to Communism. Communism leads to inevitable failure at its end.