Well, seeing as how you were the first to say: Communism is not the way to go I see it fit that you should first lay out your points as to why.
Slyguy7 and Djugashvili: Communism
-
Can i join in?
-
Anyone can
I still however can't right now. I'm going to need some time to construct a case and lay down the law, so if you'd like to, I urge you to affirm why Communism is good.
I do realize I'm the one that wanted to debate it in the first place but again I do need time to gather info, etc. You should take some time and construct a case as well so it'll be almost like a real debate 
Peace & Love -
Hm yeah well you lost me... I can only really speculate on Soviet Russia and the Soviet Bloc, from the 1914-1915 Bolshevik Revolution-The fall of communism in 1989, anything within those perameters (sp?) I have atleast some knowledge about. Although what i don't know are the terms, for example I don't know what type of Communism you are referring to and where it was applied. What nationality are you by the way?
-
btw, cases involve definitions in order to make the debate clear, they go in the beginning so that we all know what you're talking about throughout the debate; I have no clue what all that Red lingo means :p
Peace & Love -
Slyguy7 wrote:
Anyone can
I still however can't right now. I'm going to need some time to construct a case and lay down the law, so if you'd like to, I urge you to affirm why Communism is good.
I do realize I'm the one that wanted to debate it in the first place but again I do need time to gather info, etc. You should take some time and construct a case as well so it'll be almost like a real debate
Lol someone's excited. -
SimplyChaotique. wrote:
Hm yeah well you lost me... I can only really speculate on Soviet Russia and the Soviet Bloc, from the 1914-1915 Bolshevik Revolution-The fall of communism in 1989, anything within those perameters (sp?) I have atleast some knowledge about. Although what i don't know are the terms, for example I don't know what type of Communism you are referring to and where it was applied. What nationality are you by the way?
Oh, lol I meant Djugashvili
---------- Post added at 08:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:21 PM ----------
SimplyChaotique. wrote:
Lol someone's excited.
you bet
Peace & Love -
Yeah i gathered. If i do end up doing this arguement, i'm supporting yourside. IMO Communism is effective in theory but has many faults.
-
It would be extremely difficult to sum it all up. ;)
---------- Post added at 07:30 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:25 PM ----------
SimplyChaotique. wrote:
Hm yeah well you lost me... I can only really speculate on Soviet Russia and the Soviet Bloc, from the 1914-1915 Bolshevik Revolution-The fall of communism in 1989, anything within those perameters (sp?) I have atleast some knowledge about. Although what i don't know are the terms, for example I don't know what type of Communism you are referring to and where it was applied. What nationality are you by the way?
No worries that is generally what these debates become anyways, I was refering to the ideology held by the USSR 1922-1953.
I am a Afrikaans South African in Canada.
Slyguy7 wrote:
btw, cases involve definitions in order to make the debate clear, they go in the beginning so that we all know what you're talking about throughout the debate; I have no clue what all that Red lingo means :p
Are you making this rule up as you go a long as to save the time of flipping through the pages of a dictionary? xD
Slyguy7 wrote:
Anyone can
I still however can't right now. I'm going to need some time to construct a case and lay down the law, so if you'd like to, I urge you to affirm why Communism is good.
I do realize I'm the one that wanted to debate it in the first place but again I do need time to gather info, etc. You should take some time and construct a case as well so it'll be almost like a real debate
Hmmm, I do not know where to start, how could a classless Stateless society benefit the people? (That was a rhetorical question.
-
Well just letting you know what I'm going to do. It can be as long as you want so long as it's in you're own words.
I. Intro
- state your thesis (what you believe, the point of your whole speech)
- definitions (all those that are important)
- state your supporting main points (these are the points that will be debated)
II. 1st contention,
- supporting evidence, etc., persuasion, etc.
2nd contention, 3rd, can be up to 5, but make sure it's not excessive
III. Conclusion, wrap it all up. Summary, restate main points, etc.
Peace & Love -
BTW being classless and stateless is one of the problems, it dismisses organisation in many forms and leads way to chaos. Without classes everyone is so generalised people are refused their say, they count for nothing, they have no need for goals and aspirations because they are bound by the rest of society.
Corruption is also another problem, people in the 'higher ranking' spots such as parliament or law enforcement (which also kind of undermines the whole system anyway) abuse their positions to obtain benefits over the other people...
Basically it leaves people who deserve more, having less, and people who do nothing to have more. Not very equal or fair in reality.
---------- Post added at 11:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:50 AM ----------
and on a side note, i'm not bothered to construct a whole arguement. lol -
SimplyChaotique. wrote:
BTW being classless and stateless is one of the problems, it dismisses organisation in many forms and leads way to chaos. Without classes everyone is so generalised people are refused their say, they count for nothing, they have no need for goals and aspirations because they are bound by the rest of society.
Corruption is also another problem, people in the 'higher ranking' spots such as parliament or law enforcement (which also kind of undermines the whole system anyway) abuse their positions to obtain benefits over the other people...
Basically it leaves people who deserve more, having less, and people who do nothing to have more. Not very equal or fair in reality.
---------- Post added at 11:51 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:50 AM ----------
and on a side note, i'm not bothered to construct a whole arguement. lol
The only form of organization it eliminates is the orgainization of the pupulation into classes, I do not see how generalization can refuse peoples say. In Real life it is the ruling class (bourgeoisie) that tells us what we can say and what we cannot. Goals and Aspirations do not always always have to be ''I will be the richest man in the world''. For most the goal of becoming rich is a useless one because the self-made man is a myth (The Millions of poor people even in ''The land of Opportunity'' that have no hope in hell of ever becoming rich).
Parliament would be non-existent, also with the dissolution of Money there would be no point of curruption.
Basically it leaves people who deserve more, having less, and people who do nothing to have more. Not very equal or fair in reality. That sounds a lot like Capitalism. -
Djugashvili wrote:
The only form of organization it eliminates is the orgainization of the pupulation into classes, I do not see how generalization can refuse peoples say. In Real life it is the ruling class (bourgeoisie) that tells us what we can say and what we cannot. Goals and Aspirations do not always always have to be ''I will be the richest man in the world''. For most the goal of becoming rich is a useless one because the self-made man is a myth (The Millions of poor people even in ''The land of Opportunity'' that have no hope in hell of ever becoming rich).
Parliament would be non-existent, also with the dissolution of Money there would be no point of curruption.
Basically it leaves people who deserve more, having less, and people who do nothing to have more. Not very equal or fair in reality. That sounds a lot like Capitalism.
Start by saying Capitalism atleast gives them a chance.
And the bourgeoisie is French, where does that come in? x)
Also there must be classes in order for there to be organisation (not social classes) but i'm saying that there are some leader in communism, who get all the control, which basically contradicts the system. Everyone is trapped to the assets that they get (talking from materialistic point of view), and by having no parliament reinforces the fact that people have very little say, they do not have the opportunity to express their views in the way that democracy allows.
If there is a problem within the population, it is dismissed and they are told (often by force during that time) to cut it out and resumes doing what the government tell them to do.
There is no power to the people.
Also what are some goals that people can aspire to? They don't get any choice. -
Djugashvili wrote:
Well, seeing as how you were the first to say: Communism is not the way to go I see it fit that you should first lay out your points as to why.
I hate that stupid ass flag you have as your avatar. It's the most [removed] thing I've ever seen in my entire life and judging by the fact you're actually using it, you need to seriously die. The Orange Free State and Transvaal Republic do not exist and you don't have a right to show their flags.I give cam shows every now and then, but I MUST know you and be comfortable with you before I will do them for you! If interested, contact me and get to know me! -
What is it though?
-
SimplyChaotique. wrote:
Start by saying Capitalism atleast gives them a chance.
And the bourgeoisie is French, where does that come in? x)
Also there must be classes in order for there to be organisation (not social classes) but i'm saying that there are some leader in communism, who get all the control, which basically contradicts the system. Everyone is trapped to the assets that they get (talking from materialistic point of view), and by having no parliament reinforces the fact that people have very little say, they do not have the opportunity to express their views in the way that democracy allows.
If there is a problem within the population, it is dismissed and they are told (often by force during that time) to cut it out and resumes doing what the government tell them to do.
There is no power to the people.
Also what are some goals that people can aspire to? They don't get any choice.
The chances of succeeding for a worker to become rich in a Capitalist society is almost non-existent, Communism does not mean everlasting poverty.
The leader in a Communist society by no means has all the control, and also at least the leaders would be working in the interests of the people as a whole not just their rich little friends as in Capitalism.
Parliament really has very little to do with what the people want in Capitalism as well... When there are no classes everything will be in everyones interests.
Thus the ''leader'' would be representing the entire population therefore the power is to the people.
But everybody being trapped to the assets they own is a little bit of a strange statement and I would like for you to explain this.
However if you were talking about Capitalism is would make a lot of of sense because most people are as they do no have the money to buy a new car every single year.
Yes, Bourgeoisie is French originally but it is used in English as well.
---------- Post added at 08:22 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:21 PM ----------
SimplyChaotique. wrote:
What is it though?
The ones who own the means of production.
---------- Post added at 08:26 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:22 PM ----------
Aleksandr wrote:
I hate that stupid ass flag you have as your avatar. It's the most [removed] thing I've ever seen in my entire life and judging by the fact you're actually using it, you need to seriously die. The Orange Free State and Transvaal Republic do not exist and you don't have a right to show their flags.
I have every right to show their falgs, there is nothing wrong with them and I shall do so as I please.
If you think that the Orange Free State flag is represents racism and Apartheid you are mistaken, it represented the oppressed Afrikaans in their fight against the British who put them in Concentration camps to get at the gold in the Transvaal.
Get your fact straight. -
I have to go in a second, so i'll just say this;
Just because everyone is in the same social class, how does that mean everyone has the same interests...what i get from that statement is that everyone is forced to have the same interest.
-
Share