EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum

That capitalism is superior to socialism

0 points
5 points
9spaceking9spaceking (CON)
My argument is simple. Under socialism [https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/socialism.asp], the government shares resources among the people. This ensures equality and prevents poverty on a large level. Capitalism has varying levels of disparity, and 99% of the world's finance is held by the top 1% of people, who are in capitalist societies. This is clearly unfair. So Socialism is superior to capitalism.
Return To Top | Posted:
2020-10-23 21:32:21
| Speak Round
NuraiiiiiiNuraiiiiii (PRO)
)}Socialism is a political, social and economic philosophy encompassing a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and workers' self-management of enterprises.(Wikipedia)
      1)government not only shares but also controls the entire market in "social country."{https://www.thebalance.com/socialism-types-pros-cons-examples-3305592} which is disadvantage (people can not make a decision for themselves). 
       2) Let's take USSR as an example. Of course for first time socialism looked like lifebuoy. the poor people finally became free and in general they became the "government". everyone now has the same opportunities and the same profits. and everyone is happy (except for the rich people from whom everything was taken). But that's not all... Everyone works.  someone works as a teacher and someone plows the land for days, but still all have the same salary. That is how "vodka" came in Russia (USSR). now people began to understand that it is not necessary to work so hard, you can not work at all. {https://businessviews.com.ua/ru/business/id/kratkaja-istorija-sssr-dlja-teh-kto-ne-ponimaet-kakuju-uzhasno-moguchuju-stranu-my-poterjali-26-let-nazad-1633/} 
    3) so now lets talk about capitalism.
Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their operation for profit.(Wikipedia)
Development. Competition. Competition is one of keys of development.every year new records are recorded in sports, scientific, and many other competitions. and it doesn't matter what country you are from, what religion, what color or whether you are healthy. each has its own competition. and this is all happening in a capitalist country. that's what real freedom is. 

Return To Top | Posted:
2020-10-25 17:26:10
| Speak Round
9spaceking9spaceking (CON)
Good idea about competition. But Socialism was not truly accomplished during the USSR's rein. Another site (http://www.deleonism.org/text/91100594.htm) notes: "The idea that there would be no incentive for workers to be productive in a socialist society is a myth, reinforced by the myth that the Soviet Union is, or was, socialist. In the Soviet Union, the incentive to be a productive member of society was severely damaged by the oppressive, self-serving rule of the bureaucracy. Workers had no assurance that diligent work or improvements in productivity would benefit them in any way. This contributed to the breakdown of that system.

In a genuine socialist society, workers would have strong incentives to work conscientiously and improve the means and methods of production-incentives far stronger than those that exist under either the Soviet system or capitalism.

The moral and social incentive to be a productive and responsible member of society would be rein-forced by the knowledge that one's efforts would truly be benefiting all society, and not merely an idle class of social parasites.

The material incentives to be productive, and to improve productivity, would be strengthened as well. With capitalist exploitation abolished, workers would receive the full social value of their labor. The rewards of their own labor, and of improvements in efficiency, would accrue to them, and not to a separate class of owners. Thus, they would have "the possibility" of becoming well off materially -- a far greater possibility than they have today -- from their own labor. And the more efficiently they produce, the more they could enjoy, with a shorter and shorter workweek.

In sum, workers would have strong incentives to be productive in a socialist society because they would be working for themselves and the social interest, simultaneously. With no ruling class in existence, the workers' interest and the social interest would be one and the same."

As you can see, with everyone working together to accomplish true socialism, it's entirely plausible that this would have the same competition benefit as capitalism, and still yet prevent poverty resulting from wealth disparity created from capitalist societies.

Return To Top | Posted:
2020-10-26 00:46:48
| Speak Round
NuraiiiiiiNuraiiiiii (PRO)

It cannot be said that the USSR was a socialist country from beginning to end. But during the reign of Lenin (1917-1924) this country was a socialist power. Therefore, it was called the Soviet Union of Socialist Russia. But as mentioned earlier, the country's economy fell. There were some reforms, congresses, meetings that were created and changed all the time to catch up and achieve the same degree of economy as in Western Europe. (https://www.history.com/topics/russia/vladimir-lenin) People worked hard. People wanted to work. And they were able to achieve all goals in a short time. They built railways that are now left, they built houses (not large) and statues, they are the first to design radio ... (https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%96%D0%B5 % D0% BB% D0% B5% D0% B7% D0% BD% D0% BE% D0% B4% D0% BE% D1% 80% D0% BE% D0% B6% D0% BD% D1% 8B% D0 % B9_% D1% 82% D1% 80% D0% B0% D0% BD% D1% 81% D0% BF% D0% BE% D1% 80% D1% 82_% D0% B2_% D0% A1% D0% A1 % D0% A1% D0% A0) But why are they still workers? Why did people starve and die in 1918? (Https://fb.ru/article/162580/godyi-pravleniya-lenina-metodyi-upravleniya-i-itogi)
  The answer to this question is very simple. If they all become more and less rich and can feed themselves, then who will work? That is, the idea of ​​socialism is work and work? That is, all people must work and at the same time have a sufficient amount of money (this is still possible)? It turns out that the entire economy of the country lies with the people. And if they get tired of it? Then the economy will collapse.

Finally it's not a fact that all workers will work hard. Or that they get what they deserve. But if this is a small country and a country with a developed economy like Switzerland, then this is certainly possible. But even Switzerland has achieved such success thanks to capitalism.(https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/02/opinion/sunday/switzerland-capitalism-wealth.html)
 Moreover, in a socialist society, the government plays too many roles. They control the entire market of the country, they will not allow you to have at least a small business, they will not want you to be the boss.
 About the capitalism ... No one is stopping you from building a business or making money or becoming rich. I think the first thing that each country should do is helping . Helping to those really wants to make a business or those who are studying or those with some health problems . But they should develope economy first of course. And
 If there would be great politics with developed economy in country with great workers , MAY be socialism will be good idea.

Return To Top | Posted:
2020-10-27 07:24:53
| Speak Round
9spaceking9spaceking (CON)
Actually, the examples of socialism where the gov. controls everything is a bit misrepresentation. According to The Balance (https://www.thebalance.com/socialism-types-pros-cons-examples-3305592), the idealized version of socialism is "Socialism is an economic system where everyone in society equally owns the factors of production.1 That ownership is acquired through a democratically elected government or through a cooperative or a public corporation in which everyone owns shares." The problem is that the current implementations are actually communism policies which are counter-productive, as no one wants to produce for bosses that just lazy around. With everyone relatively equal and giving power to trusted people, they would be able to produce for themselves similar to capitalism. The problem with Capitalism is that it's possible to hold onto monopolies or say "I came here first, I should have sole control over the land". You conceded that if a developed country with great workers existed socialism would work. But capitalism would mean it would be unfair as the market is based mainly on luck and timing rather than equality and fairness. So Socialism is still superior to capitalism.
Return To Top | Posted:
2020-10-28 00:55:29
| Speak Round
NuraiiiiiiNuraiiiiii (PRO)
 I really want to look at this countries. But I couldn't find socialistic country with great economy.{https://visasam.ru/emigration/vybor/socialisticheskie-kommunisticheskie-strany.html#i-7}. I would be really happy if you show me these vary countries. Well I found some disadvantages to socialism...

 1. Unequal Distribution of Factors of Production

In the socialism economic, the planning authorities decide the basket of commodities to be produced.

Thus, The market mechanism operates in a free market economy is conspicuous by its absence in this economics.
 2. Bureaucratization

The owners of private Enterprises take interest in their work in capitalist economy.

But in socialism, the government gets the work done through their people who do not take so much interest and lack enthusiasm.

3. Absence of Individual Incentives and Initiatives

In the capitalism economy, private ownership and profit motive are the two factors leading to initiation of the work carried out by the individual whereas in the socialist economy incentives and initiation is lacking.

4. Efficiency Not Properly Rewarded

Profit maximization leads to the best utilization of resources in capitalism.

In socialism, neither the proper distribution of factors of production is done and the absence of profit motive gives a serious drawback to it.

5. Concentration of Economic Power in Hands of State

The power gets concentrated in the hands of government or the state and Thus government may not work according to the desires and preferences of the consumers

Capitalism has got some disadvantages too. And may be more than socialism. Honestly, I had chosen pro to find out my rival as fast as possible...

Return To Top | Posted:
2020-10-29 16:52:34
| Speak Round
9spaceking9spaceking (CON)
I don't think Pro has read my previous round, as the democratically elected socialism solves problems 1 and 5. The other problems are really minor, and the motivation for production is that the producers are also the consumers, so the more you produce the better of you are. He hasn't tackled the possibility of monopolies in capitalism and producing big problems with free market. With zero regulation, any prices can be charged and selfish businessmen may be far worse than any governmental entity, since getting rid of businesses can only be replaced by other businesses.
Return To Top | Posted:
2020-10-29 17:05:07
| Speak Round

View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
Thanks for great debate :)That was my first debate... Sorry if smth was wrong
Posted 2020-10-28 03:45:32
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

2020-11-02 05:07:52
HartleroadmJudge: Hartleroadm
Win awarded to: 9spaceking
I believe that 9spaceking won this debate because Nuraiiiiii never gave a full argument on why they believed capitalism was superior to socialism. In their opening argument, they defined the two terms, and, in my eyes, made a point for socialism being superior.
0 comments on this judgement
2020-11-09 18:44:31
dpowell3543Judge: dpowell3543    TOP JUDGE
Win awarded to: 9spaceking
This one was a bit weird and hard to read. Pro had a lot to work with and go off of and could have easily had much, much better arguments than Con. But, thanks to Pro's lack of general structure and grammar, I found it fairly painful to try and read. But read it did. Con provided much more sensible and easier arguments to read. To help Con's case even further, Pro forfeited the first round, which means that Con had one more chance to argue their point than Pro did, giving Con the clear advantage.

Pro- I don't know if you're a native English speaker or not (sorry in advance if you aren't), but work on your grammar. Also, work on the organization of your arguments. Split them up into different sections, with each section having it's own topic. That way, your arguments aren't a jumbled mess with everyone trying to both understand what you're trying to say and piece it all together.

Con- I noticed that you either forgot, or ignored the way that socialism works. So I'm just going to explain here, in case you get into another debate on this topic. According to Karl Marx and his Communist Manifesto, socialism should work like this: The working class people should rise up and over throw the rich people and take all their money and power away, then, using their new gained power, they redistribute that money and power to the people, except those who used to be rich. Eventually, the nation will turn into a Communist nation. According to Karl Marx, Communism is the ultimate goal of Socialism.
0 comments on this judgement

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 4 rounds
  • 10000 characters per round
  • Reply speeches
  • Uses cross-examination
  • Permissive Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds does not mean forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 1 day
  • Time to vote: 3 weeks
  • Time to prepare: None
This is a random challenge. See the general rules for random challenges at http://www.edeb8.com/resources/General+rules+for+random+debates+%28version+2%29