CreateDebate


Debate Info

13
10
Yes No
Debate Score:23
Arguments:18
Total Votes:25
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (9)
 
 No (7)

Debate Creator

JorgeBarrios(7) pic



Should Communism be given another chance?

As history has shown us all, communism and socialism has been portrayed and used as a horrible system of government and life. However, people throughout the world still believe that communism and socialism could have had a more positive reputation if the system was practiced in its pure form. So, should humanity give another shot at communism and socialism?

Yes

Side Score: 13
VS.

No

Side Score: 10
2 points

Firstly, Hitler was not a communist, he was a fascist, and secondly, I would only support communism if it were anarcho-syndicalism, like the peasants in Monty Python and the Holy Grail and the Spanish Civil War.

Side: Yes
GuitaristDog(2547) Clarified
2 points

Hitler was a socialist. Stalin was a communist. They were both fascists and tyrants.

Side: Yes
anachronist(889) Disputed
2 points

Hitler was partially socialist, but not in the usual sense. Rather than seeking elimination of class and equality, he actually wanted to keep the hierachial class system of Germany, but make the workers stronger so that Germany overall would be stronger. Oh, and it's probably worth mentioning that one of Hitler's main aims was the eradication of communism, hence the tension between him and Stalin in the Nazi-Soviet pact.

I don't think fascist is the correct word to describe Stalin however, I think authoritarian makes more sense when describing a left wing analogy, as fascism is usually associated with the right wing. Of course, this is due to the outdated one dimensional political spectrum and is merely a linguistic construct.

Either way, yes, both were authoritarian totalitarian ballbag touchers.

Side: No

Yes. I believe so. Many countries who have democracy are not even improving. I think change must be done. If its good, then its worth keeping.

Side: Yes
x420xHustler(228) Clarified
2 points

I would support such an effort at least on pluralist grounds. Democracy and communism shouldn't be mutually exclusive in my opinion though.

Side: Yes
2 points

Yes even though Communism is not perfect it can be better then what we have.... it just depends on the type of communism.

Side: Yes
1 point

Firstly, my regards to the creator of such an excellent debate topic. Now I would like my views to be learned.

Firstly, I think it should be given another chance. History has shown us that communist groups have always been very powerful with the support of the public. Hitler and Vladimir were one of the heroes of communism, and we have the results of their leadership.

Secondly, as mentioned before, a government is of the people, by the people and for the people, without respect of its type ( monarchy, democracy or communist ). So until and unless it has the support of the public, it cant be successful. Communism has this in ample.

Thirdly, they lead by cause. Communism groups have no rules and do not accept the social rules and regulations. Their existence is because of their cause. We don't find this in democracies and monarchies, where people are ready to oppose the leader.

I would thus conclude by adding my last and very important point : communism should be given another chance until and unless -

/ they are very necessary ( because they tend to fight for existence, which is not necessary at all times )

/their aims are noble ( not like dominating the world, like what happened with hitler )

/it should accept the rules made by society and rules of other cultures & origins

THANK YOU.

Side: Yes
1 point

Thank you as well for providing such an excellent argument. In all honesty, I support a great majority of the facts you shared. However, I have to say that I as a communist follower do not, and will never place Hitler under that category. I strongly believe that his views were complete garbage. In theory, neither communism nor socialism support the idea of a mester race dominating the world. Socialism and communism support a more peaceful ideology in which the idea of race and nations do not exist. This is done to have a more peaceful environmet and so all people of Earth, no matter what cultures, ethnicities, or religions they come from can live in harmony together and to live in community. Thus, the meaning of Communism. Hitler didnt promote that view. He even had his regime burn any books that supported such an idea, for exaple, communist or socialist books. He also launched a campaign for not only his military, but for his people, to show mass hatred towards the people Hitler hated, especially, the Jews. Overall, I dont believe Hitler was really socialist. His actions sure did not show that. Good argument though.

Side: Yes
2 points

No, Communism shouldn't be given a chance. If given, they would turn the world upside down.

Side: No

No, we are already in a communistic/socialistic environment. We have been trapped like this throughout the ages, the only things that have changed are words and ideas, while the words have changed very much, the ideas still remain in a confined zone of "this is the only way it can be"

We need to seriously change that thought process. America started out independent but noone has noticed that we have been infiltrated. And if they did know about this, they were assassinated.

Side: No
Nikolaus(7) Disputed
1 point

The socialist mode of production is a specific historical phase of economic development in which the criterion for economic production is use-value, and is based on direct production for use, that is production of use-values instead of exchange-values, coordinated through conscious economic planning, where the law of value no longer directs economic activity, and thus monetary relations in the form of exchange-value, profit, interest and wage labor no longer operate. Income would be distributed according to individual contribution. The social relations of socialism are characterized by the working-class effectively controlling the means of production and the means of their livelihood either through cooperative enterprises or public ownership and self management, so that the social surplus would accrue to the working class or society as a whole. This does not fit our current society at all.

Side: Yes