Round 2: TheMythLives vs americandingbat : "Hello Comrade"

if socialism is an inevitable stage of historic development, there has never been a socialist state.

must involve political as well as economic restructuring;

”In contemporary politics the term left is applied to social liberalism, social democracy, socialism, communism, and most forms of anarchism.”

So I think it is important to view who is on the left, after all those who are on the left are viewed as Socialist.

Lets look closely at what history says. Infact many socialist states have existed, while we may label them as full blooded communist, that infact is ignorance on our part, as there is a definate difference and even labeled in the states consitution as "socialism" while here in the US we call them commies.

Do you think that the United States as constituted by the U.S. Constitution qualified as a “democratic republic”?

Do you think that the German Democratic Republic qualified as a “democratic republic”?

Do you think that the claims a country makes in its self-naming or its political rhetoric are the best indications of the actual political structure of that country?

Most of the states listed are variations on totalitarianism or despotism, in which ownership and control of the means of production lie not with the people but with one person (or a small cabal of people) who claim to administer them for the equal benefit of all.

Question 1) Whom do you think the recent bank bailouts benefited more, bank executives or working class Americans?

Question 2) Do you think that Obama’s Stimulus Package reflects the collective decision of the productive class of the United States of America as to how our wealth can be used for the benefit of all?

Question 3) Do you think most of the political and economic power in the United States of America is held in the hands of an elite class?

Question 4) If the answer to #3 was “yes”, do you foresee this fact changing in the near future? If the answer to #3 was “no”, how do you think power is distributed in the United States?

But in Marx’s argument, the crisis must arise not within the class of property owners, but between those who control the means of production and those who work for them. The result will be an uprising of the working class against the existing power structures.

Every reform that my opponent claims is “socialist” has been made by and within the power structure, not for the greater good of working Americans but for the greater good of the power elite.

Instead, we have a working class that believes itself to share the goals and values of the elite in opposition to a non-working destitute class, and a destitute class dependent on the elite for their continued survival through government handouts! This is not Socialism – it is a means to temporarily assuage protests among the poorer classes, and to trick them into seeing each other, rather than the captains of banking and industry, as enemies.

1) How much Socialist ideas are in our political world? On a scale of 0 to 100% (100% obviously being the greatest).

2) Do you feel that we are in a transitional phase toward a different style government?

3) Do you think most of the political and economic power in the United States of America is held in the hands of an elite class? (I think this is highly important)

4) If the answer to #3 was “yes”, do you foresee this fact changing in the near future?

What’s more important is that Marx and Engels changed their minds about these ten guidelines

I don’t think we need put much stock in a list of suggestions that Marx and Engels felt needed to be singled out in a later edition as being a passage that they no longer felt applied, that they would write very differently.

In 2009 there has never in the history of the world been a large-scale proletariat uprising to overthrow a capitalist bourgeois class as Marx had envisioned it.

TheMythLives(TML)/americandingbat(adb)

I really enjoyed this debate. Both fighters gave a opening I liked. Brief, to the point. I would have liked to seen maybe a bit more of TML's stance in his opening so adb took the first round.

TML starts his actual case strong with a list of Socialist policies that have been enacted. He lists the current Democratic movers and shakers but fails to really define them as socialists. As adb pointed out, the left is a lot more than Socialism. Adb also picked apart the list of countries quite easily.

This trend continues for most of the debate. Adb refuted most of TML's claims efficently. She uses the heads of several Socialist parties descriptions to show that the Socialists themselves don't consider any policies of the day something they would support.

TML seemed to get to caught up on the history aspect of it. Although relevant, I didn't feel he made the connection clear enough. He needed to be a bit more succinct in the way he presented it.

Overall, I scored it 4-1 to the winner, americandingbat.

Opening statements

This round goes to americandingbat (ADB). Her expanded definition of socialism seemed much more thorough and better defined the scope of the debate than did TheMythLive's (TML). ADB also makes a brilliant observation by making the distinction between moving toward and being ready for (the actual topic of debate).

ADB +1

First Round

TML now gets into the meat and potatoes of his argument and it is an excellent post indeed. He lists examples of existing government programs that already have a socialist bent to them as well as some politicians who do not hide the fact they have socialist plans in mind. This was an excellent strategy in the fact it provides evidence we are ready to make a shift towards socialism because we already have socialist programs.

TML +1

I would have awarded him 2 points but ADB comes in and dismantles some important parts of his arguments.

She points out that just because some left leaning politicians might be labeled socialists by the right leaning politicians does not mean they actually are socialists. She also confirms my confusion by questioning embryonic stem cell research being a socialist action.

ADB +1

She also did an incredible job questioning the veracity of the examples of socialist countries.

Another point for ADB. ADB +1

Second Round

Excellent Socratic answers by TML. It looks like he nailed every one of them with incredible responses.

TML +1

TML then proceeds to submit evidence of more shifts towards socialism. The only thing I would have liked to have seen him focus on more is what ADB pointed out before: We may be shifting towards socialism in some aspects but are we actually ready for it? Is it beneficial? Is this trend good for America? While indeed showing evidence we are heading in that direction, it would have been nice if TML also had elaborated on how the shifts represent the fact it is not only occurring but that we are also ready for it instead of leaving the reader and judges to connect the dots.

ADB did an exceptional job of answering Socratic questions 2 and 4 in particular. It was very smart of her to differentiate between political, economic, and government socialism and to review the classification the US would fall under.

ADB +1

We now get into the focused matter of the debate: Being ready for the shift. Karl Marx is brought into the equation and showing how a crisis often precedes a shift to socialism. Since many believe we are in crisis mode, this could very well be evidence of 'being ready' for socialism.

Both debaters had a good exchange on this concept so both debaters are awarded 1 point each.

ADB +1
TML +1

Third Round

Both debaters did well in answering the socratic questions posed by the opponent but it felt like neither of them took full advantage of the openings given to them to expand on their answers in how it supported their position.

However, they both redeem themselves in the meat of their posts when they focus on the aspects of elitist rulership and defend their stances based on the transition to power of the state. Both debaters did well in this round but ADB came out slightly ahead with her rebuttal. Therefore TML will be awarded 1 point while ADB will be awarded 1.5 points.

ADB +1.5
TML +1

Closing Statements

TML begins his closing statement by offering a great comeback of defending his previous points as still being applicable. (+1 TML) He then uses a tactic ADB used previously by explaining the different forms of socialism and how the US appears to not only be moving in that direction but that in many cases, socialism is already here in a very big way. (+1 TML) TML then makes another slam dunk point by explaining the multiple socialist aspect already existing in American society. (+1TML)

Total closing points for TML: 3

ADB fires back by breaking down TML's examples, specifically Obama being labeled a socialist. She provides great resources defending her position again that Obama is not technically a socialist. (+1 ADB) She proceeds to make some fantastic points of her own by pointing out Marx's own labeling of capitalism concerning political control and I loved her point about the bankers. (+1 ADB).

Total closing points for ADB: 2

General Assessment

Wonderful fight by both debaters. They both did an excellent job and this debate was a pleasure to read and judge. I look forward to seeing more of their work in this forum. But, there can only be one winner.

Point tallies:

ADB: 8.5
TML: 7

I deem ADB the winner.

Judgement- Americandingbat wins.

Opening;

TheMythLives-Begins with broad definition.

Americandingbat-also begins by defining the topic. AD tries to very tightly define the topic so as to narrow down the debate. No real advantage gained by either in opening.

Round One;

TheMythLives- Begins to show the socialist aspects of our system, in keeping with his/her opening definition. There is a quote in the first round,



which has no attribution. I reread both opening posts several times, and never did figure out what or whom was being quoted here, or how it was relevant. As a technical detail, it is important to tell the reader who is being quoted and why.

Another thing that added more confusion to the argument than clarity was his/her point on stem cell research. The claim was made that this was socialist somehow, (TML claims this will lead to more abortions,) but there was no argument made to show how either stem cell research or abortion was socialist, nor how the one, (stem cell research) was anticipated to have any causal effect on abortion. The point added absolutely nothing to the argument.

TML then drops an unquoted source, titled "great read" and follows it with a list of things, but he/she does nothing at all to do anything with the list of consequences of socialism. The overall tone of the first round suggests that while TML is arguing that socialism IS what we are moving towards, TML also feels negatively about this. As a debate point, however, linking to a source with the expectation that the source will make your argument for you is a bad tactic. As a judge, I am not judging your sources ability to make an argument. I am judging yours. In this case, nothing whatsoever was done to utilize this source in this debate. It might as well have not been there at all.

Americandingbat- begins by rebutting, rather neatly, TML's non-argument. Although AD does this well enough, the rest of the post is not used to further her argument, but to again restate the definition she intends to use. A better use of the space and round would have been to begin the debate in earnest, rather than simply promising to begin it in the next round. It could have been a won round, but instead it leaves us still even. No real ground has been gained by either debater at this point.

Round Two;

TheMythLives- begins again with sloppy quoting. It is clear to this judge that he/she is quoting his/her opponent, but in terms of form, this should be made clear by a statement by TML. The external source is not attributed at all, which is just really poor form. As an answer to the second Socratic question, I have no idea if TML intended us to accept the "no" at the outset, or the "then certainly it its socialist. " he/she adds at the end.

The rest of TML's post is just not argument. He/she promises to show how the bailout is socialism, but does little to do so, aside from mentioning that Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae have been nationalized. Nothing is done to show HOW the bailout money was nationalization, or even what nationalization means. This was followed by several lengthy quotes and another list. None of which were really in support of promise to show how the bailout was socialist.

Then another claim is made by TML;



which is followed by more listing and absolutely no supporting argument.

Americandingbat- Handily counters TML's post. It was well done from the answering of the Socratic questions through the ending where she both rebutted TML's statements that indicate America is socialist with a very brief though highly effective argument that illustrates why what we have is NOT socialist. Round goes to AD.

Round Three;

TheMythLives- Essentially, TML has handed the debate to his opponent with the answers to the Socratic questions. He/she seems utterly unaware of this fact. Mostly because TML is not really very aware of what socialism is outside of the propagandized use of the term. (Which is simply "call what you don't like 'socialism.'")

Using other ATS threads as sources is also very sketchy, as TML does with the "Bankers Manifesto." If there were an original source, that should have been cited, rather than the thread linked to. As much as we all love ATS, a random post or thread on ATS is not a "proof" of anything. With no link to confirm that Lindbergh indeed said that, it is just the word of another ATS member.

Again, TML seems to be confusing fascism with socialism. He/she seems blissfully unaware that they are not equivalent terms.

Americandingbat- again, handily counters TML argument. She deftly points out the misconceptions that TML is holding regarding totalitarianism and socialism, and underlines that by proving the one (totalitarianism) he/she is actually disproving the other (socialism.) Round goes to AD.

Closing;

TheMythLives- begins by insisting that the list of ten guidelines outlined by Marx and Engels are what we are seeing in America today. Despite the fact that the bulk of his/her argument is not that resources are being transferred from private owners to the people as a collective, but rather that these things are being concentrated in fewer and fewer hands. His/her misunderstanding of socialism has proven fatal to his/her case.

Americandingbat- closes very well. And wins the round, and the debate.

Summary;

TheMythLives- let his/her own personal beliefs and positions spoil their argument. First, by assuming too much to be self evident, and not actually providing us with his/her argument, and secondly, (and most fatally,) by holding a mistaken view of what socialism is. I say this not because I believe socialism is "good," but because quite simply, what TML was describing was not socialism. As his/her opponent pointed out, in many places, what TML was describing was the opposite of socialism.

Americandingbat- displayed a very good understanding of both capitalism and socialism, and used this understanding effectively in debate. She addressed her opponents points and countered them when needed, she also allowed her opponent to argue her position for her when appropriate. Very well done.

The debate goes to Americandingbat.