Difference between revisions of "Debate: Communism"

From Conservapedia
Jump to: navigation, search
(Communism is a very, very old idea)
(Links)
Line 9: Line 9:
 
:As to communism and moreso communists themselves, the debate is not usually worth having.  '''They can't even be honest about communism's existence wherever it has existed''' - both pre or post Marx.  Bring up Venezuela?  That wasn't real communism.  USSR?  That was just a dictatorship, not communism.  They will scream bloody murder that communism has never been tried even though it has been tried dozens, if not hundreds of times.  I am all up for a debate but when you have a co-debater who keeps clearing facts off of the table in order to cheat in the debate and give themselves a tactical advantage, debate becomes impossible courtesy of the cheater.  Debates require facts, especially the inconvenient ones.
 
:As to communism and moreso communists themselves, the debate is not usually worth having.  '''They can't even be honest about communism's existence wherever it has existed''' - both pre or post Marx.  Bring up Venezuela?  That wasn't real communism.  USSR?  That was just a dictatorship, not communism.  They will scream bloody murder that communism has never been tried even though it has been tried dozens, if not hundreds of times.  I am all up for a debate but when you have a co-debater who keeps clearing facts off of the table in order to cheat in the debate and give themselves a tactical advantage, debate becomes impossible courtesy of the cheater.  Debates require facts, especially the inconvenient ones.
  
:As Benjamin Constant explains in his ''The Liberty of Ancients Compared with that of Moderns'', the "liberty" of the ancients consists of a collective "liberty", that is, government granted rights.  One of the biggest flaws of any of these isms from Europe is that they all believe that government is the pinnacle of existence.  Communists like to play that their ideas are some of the newest on the planet, when in reality all Marx did was re-package the flaws of the ancients into a new box with new wrapping paper. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 06:49, 16 July 2019 (EDT)
+
:As Benjamin Constant explains[https://www.cato.org/blog/benjamin-constant-eloquent-defender-freedom] in his ''The Liberty of Ancients Compared with that of Moderns'',[https://web.archive.org/web/20160320234406/http://www.uark.edu/depts/comminfo/cambridge/ancients.html] the "liberty" of the ancients consists of a collective "liberty", that is, government granted rights.  One of the biggest flaws of any of these "isms" from Europe is that they all believe that government is the pinnacle of existence.  Communists like to play that their ideas are some of the newest on the planet, when in reality all Marx did was re-package the flaws of the ancients into a new box with new wrapping paper.  Reagan was correct when he said: "This idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except to sovereign people, is still the newest and most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man."  That's because the basis of Communism is not the individualist Liberty of the Moderns, communism is based on the collectivist "liberty" of the ancients. [[User:Progressingamerica|Progressingamerica]] ([[User talk:Progressingamerica|talk]]) 06:54, 16 July 2019 (EDT)

Revision as of 05:54, 16 July 2019

This is a debate page solely to discuss communism, at the insistence of the individual calling himself "MarxistLeninist".

  • Rules:
The debate will be civil.
Individuals debating will not be blocked from doing so.
IP addresses will be blocked if they are determined to be proxies. Karajou (talk) 02:07, 16 July 2019 (EDT)
Since the original user's history has been entirely wiped out, what exactly were they asking to be debated? Was it yet another Marxism vs Capitalism debate? Was it a debate about something specific on one or more pages? Was it the superiority of his wiki vs ours?
As to communism and moreso communists themselves, the debate is not usually worth having. They can't even be honest about communism's existence wherever it has existed - both pre or post Marx. Bring up Venezuela? That wasn't real communism. USSR? That was just a dictatorship, not communism. They will scream bloody murder that communism has never been tried even though it has been tried dozens, if not hundreds of times. I am all up for a debate but when you have a co-debater who keeps clearing facts off of the table in order to cheat in the debate and give themselves a tactical advantage, debate becomes impossible courtesy of the cheater. Debates require facts, especially the inconvenient ones.
As Benjamin Constant explains[1] in his The Liberty of Ancients Compared with that of Moderns,[2] the "liberty" of the ancients consists of a collective "liberty", that is, government granted rights. One of the biggest flaws of any of these "isms" from Europe is that they all believe that government is the pinnacle of existence. Communists like to play that their ideas are some of the newest on the planet, when in reality all Marx did was re-package the flaws of the ancients into a new box with new wrapping paper. Reagan was correct when he said: "This idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except to sovereign people, is still the newest and most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man." That's because the basis of Communism is not the individualist Liberty of the Moderns, communism is based on the collectivist "liberty" of the ancients. Progressingamerica (talk) 06:54, 16 July 2019 (EDT)