Help with...

[{GR}Raine]

Ok, ive got a debate for school with the simple thesis of "Communism is the best form of government" Now, i have two partners who know NOTHING really about communism, so im usually either giving them specific things to know, in which i discuss and provide material for them, otherwise its me debating. Simply put, over the next few days, ill be asking some questions, e tc. Heres my first batch:

How was/are…
Russia?
Cuba?
China?
Vietnam?
North Korea?
Not communist countries.

Now, I can explain why they failed, but Ive been doing some
eavesdropping, they seem to be trying to hit hard on all of Russias
crimes against their own people. So, as many reasons why none of these
are communist states would be nice.
Also, theyre going to say that it takes away all true freedom, unlike
democracy, and ill say something along the lines of… "In democracy, it is the
will of the people, not the well being of the people that wins an
election, as human emotion can dominate true interests. Look at
Germany, Hitler won through democratic elections, et etc" but anything
else youd like to add. This is going to take place next week, so im
just making sure ive got anything and everything covered.Thanks guys. i was worried i wouldnt be able to get the revleft input.

[Forward Union]

Communism isn't a from of government, there is no government and untimely no hierarchy in communism. The countries you listed were not communist, mainly because they had money, classes and a state.

Communism is a stateless classless society, I personally believe, along with many others, that Democracy is the most important part of communist society, as it reflects the will of the people.

Freedom by definition is 'To be exempt for the arbitrary exercise of authority' , to be truly free you can have no organised state or ruling class. Therefore communism allows for freedom like no hierarchical system could ever do.

[Irish_Bebop]

They were all ruined by meglamaniacle dictators, driven by there own ambitions and warped ideals. This isn't something unique to communism, or at least regimes that claim to be communist. The alienation of rights has nothing to do with communism, look at africa, it has suffered a similar fate of corrupt regimes and dictators, and yet they have a capitalist system in place. Its not the system thats flawed its the people, and this is a flaw that can happen within any system, if you look at all the worlds really prosperous countries, they may be capitalist, but they have had centuries of developement behind them, Everywhere else in the world has had capitalism for decades and people continue to get poorer.

Also in many of the countries that embrassed communism, the quality of life of that countries citizens improved within a period unseen by many, if any capitalist countries. Just look at Russia, its people had been living in poverty for centuares and in a fw years their quality of life improved drastically. Similar trends took place in china, and if you take the period of Maoist madness out of the equation, the chinese have lived so well, and compaired to the rest of the third world its infinintly better off, and even compairing it to its nearest capitalist counteerpart, which i would consider to be india, china and its people are in a much better position.

I would think they only way you could really prove that these countries do not constitute communist ones, is to take Marx's writtings on what the system actually entails, and compair it to what actually happened.


If you read through wikipedias section on communism youd might get some usefull information on the topic of communis states.


As communism entails the abolition of the state, a communist state is an impossibility according to communist theory. There have been, however, a large number of states ruled by self-declared Communist parties. Large scale human rights violations occurred in these states as documented in extensive historical research, particularly during the regimes of Stalin and Mao, but shown to have started immediately after the Russian revolution during the regime of Lenin and to have continued to occur in all communist states during their existence.

The many abuses that occurred under these regimes have often been used as an argument against the ideology of communism itself, especially by anti-communists, citing for instance Marx's "dictatorship of the proletariat". This is rejected by communists as a simplistic approach to historical events and ideas, noting that communism itself is stateless in theory and thus cannot be related to the actions of 20th century states. Many anti-communists consider this a dodge of criticism that could similarly justify dismissing human rights violations under capitalism as not representative of the capitalist theory. The response is usually that capitalism is inherently prone to certain abuses by defending property and profit.

Thers more, but i cant find it yet.

Communism has never been seen, and the formation of comunist states was ruined by the political climate of the time, imho.

[{GR}Raine]

wow, wtf, this topic dissapeared for some time,a nd i ahd lready made a new one in "learning" but thank you all so much! I know anarcho rebel that there is no "communist state" but its the easiest thing to label it as for now.

[13Commnists]

Stalin's government placed heavy emphasis on the provision of free medical services. Campaigns were carried out against typhus, cholera, and malaria; the number of doctors was increased as rapidly as facilities and training would permit; and death and infant mortality rates steadily decreased. All education was free and also dramatically expanded, with many more Soviet citizens learning to read and write, and higher education expanded. The people, of course, did not have the ability to study what they wanted, but were limited to the material that Stalin and the Soviet leadership permitted. The generation that grew up under Stalin also saw a major expansion in job opportunities, especially for women. Albania was nearly selfseficient with it's own foodstuffs because of Hoxha's reforms in the agriculture sector.
Hoxha confiscated farmland from wealthy landowners and consolidated it into collective farms (Cooperatives) that eventually enabled Albania to become almost completely self-sufficient in food crops. He also developed the industry and brought electricity to most rural areas, and epidemics of disease and illiteracy were stamped out.

I know you're going to use Church Commitee papers provided. But what about Haymarket? The Palmer Raids? The McCarthy arrests? The Smith Act? The US's history with the treatment and take over of Native American with their lands; and the fact that of the 371 treaties the US made with the Native Americans olny 1 hasn't been broken? The fact that 5 companies control the Media in America?

And Good Luck with the debate. :hammer:

[bed_of_nails]

It is a sure-bet that the opposition will make up some statistic about how many people are dead "due to" communism. Simply return it with capitalism. Ask them how many people have died every year due to malnourishment, the lack of medical attention, and violence in America this year. How about the past ten years? They will see that the numbers are astronomical, and Communism isnt really the mass-murder system in reality.

[Zingu]

One important note; you don't want to just build up a defense to defending Communism's name; you also want to build an offence to bring Capitalism down.

She'll be surprised your offense; instead of being a apologist about the "millions killed by Communism" respond by saying "Know how many die a day under Capitalism?".

Also talk about how capitalist governments have suppressed socialist movements like the IWW or Salvador Allende in Chile.



Anyone want to give him some info on these points? I'm very tired.

[Forward Union]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19 2005, 04:36 AM
One important note; you don't want to just build up a defense to defending Communism's name; you also want to build an offence to bring Capitalism down.

She'll be surprised your offense; instead of being a apologist about the "millions killed by Communism" respond by saying "Know how many die a day under Capitalism?".

Also talk about how capitalist governments have suppressed socialist movements like the IWW or Salvador Allende in Chile.



Anyone want to give him some info on these points? I'm very tired.
Why apologise for the dead? it wasn't communism's fault. It was corrupt socialist dictators.

Things to remember during the debate:

In Communism there is no state or government, and ultimately no hierarchy, this transcends borders; meaning there would be no nation states. For them to claim that communist countries killed millions is sheer folly.

Capitalism has resulted in so many deaths, that is impossible to ever know. We can only estimate the numbers to be in the thousands of millions, if not billions.

Freedom will flourish in a communist society, with no one telling you what to do, peoples imaginations can grow. Their opinions on world or local affairs can be contemplated and discussed in forums.

Capitalism represses and rots peoples creativity, bogged down with money and work, life becomes a struggle to pay bills, and aquire consumer products.

These are just a few things to mention. Abandon the idea that communism is the best form of state or government, this is total crap, and only helps to blur what we really stand for.

[{GR}Raine]

of course! I have many statistics on how bad capitalism is! thanks to newyouth and nationmaster, i should be fine in those areas. Im hoping to attack the current system in the first half, defend all thei attacks, then present any new great ideas before they ca rebuttal them at the end.

[OleMarxco]

If the idiots try to use the argument "democracy" as the opposite of Communism, hit them with a brick in the head. That's like saying Communism is automatically despotism (as in one person leading the whole show), and it is NOT Capitalism which is the opposite? Dumb nuts. It doesn't HAVE to be like in Soviet! Yeesus, remind them that there where a going over from Feudalism to Communism (which is wrong, they should've gone trough Capitalism first...) and the massacres were because of burgeouis attempting to overthrow it into Capitalism - which would not have been so bad since they needed to go trough a period of it to be industralized quick, and the Bolshevik's weren't saints either: They got 25% of the elections and then Lenin hijacked it all with soldiers. But try to run a "non-violent" way of approach, rising above such violence and say you want direct democracy, too....and a free gift economy with job rotation, and total elimination of corrupcy. You should win.