Bearded communists tend to be 'better' than non bearded communists

Its not like I do not know how to zoom in, but Con's font is too small. I would appreciate if he enlarges it in the next rounds.*underlined and italicized text are quotes from Con.*Non Bearded Side (Counter Rebuttal): Pol Pot: beating the French in battle?.... it's not exactly hard is it?My god this actually made me laugh. I ask voters not to take conduct from Con for this. Sorry, its just too funny XD. I have nothing much to rebut because even Con accepts that Pol Pot was terrible.Mao Zedong:Estimates of around 70 million lives is what it cost China to throw off the Japanese and attain solid independance with a strong economic and technological future. This is a high price to pay and nobody is disputing this.Mao Zedong did not Overthrow the Japanese. Though he fought against them, the leader in the war against Japan (for the Chinese side) was Chiang Kai shek who was an enemy of Mao (but they put aside their differences). That being said, with over 1.3 billion people today, it can hardly be said that they couldn't afford itSo what if there are 1.3 billion people in China today? Just because they can recover from a bad leader's actions, it does not mean that the leader was good. By Con's logic the holocaust was not bad since Jews recovered and have their own country now.We cannot discredit atrocities even if there is a recovery.The cold hard truth is that for a country of peasants to have acheived what they did - it was ALWAYS going to cost them human livesI disagree. If only Mao would have slowed down the industrialization of China then: a) He would have spared tens of millions of lives(more manpower for his new economy)b) China would still be industrialized but instead of happening in 3 years, it would take 10 years. Long term result is the same.I would also like to remind con of the disastrously high Pollution levels in China caused by the very heavy industrialization starting from Mao's era.The smog problem in China resembles Nuclear winter.[1][2]This is not to say industrialization is bad. But the extent of industrialization Mao desired and the trend that continued even through today was really dismal for the environment.In conclusion, 70 million people died to pollute the earth faster. What a great leader this Mao is! (sarcasm)Joesph Stalin:Plus Stalin had the undisputed title of best mustache until Thomas Magnum came alongThat is....irrelevant to say the least.Con main rebuttal was that Stalin was infact a good leader because of his industrialization (similar to Mao). He further consolidates this argument by quoting Fidel Castro in where he says that Stalin made mistakes but portraying him in ONLY a bad light is wrong.Castro makes a fair point, but he is not saying that Stalin was a great leader. He is only saying good things about Stalin because he wants to give credit where credit is due (atleast that is the mood portrayed by the quotes). Though we should give credit were credit is due we should not forget his atrocites committed.Perhaps it can be said that without Stalin's radical actions, the USSR would have lost WW2.I have 3 points here:1) Mother Russia has her deadly winter with or without Stalin. Attrition casualties for German soldiers is not lessened.2) Hitler would still be an idiotic commander demanding troops to NEVER retreat (I won't go into details but this is one reason they lost the war)3) Stalin weakened the red army by purging its officers and hence its leadership and coordination. Not to mention that the 20 million innocent sent to labour camps could have assisted in the war effort (that is a LOT of manpower Stalin threw down the drain)Looking at the facts, I believe that Stalin made things worse for the USSR in WW2. So the point still stands, Stalin was the worst leader of the Soviet Union (at the time where USSR needed a good leader the most)Con's Non bearded side rebuttal:Emma Goldman:She was a leader of a movement (not a revolution but meh, its acceptable). But how did she change her country for the better? Was there any positive change in her country that was directly caused or atleast influenced by her?Elamkulamm Manakkal Sankaran Namboodiripad:He was a leader of a communist party and he did rule Kerala. I will say that unlike Emma, this guy definitely changed his country for the better (albeit only one small state). But he only changed one state compared to the leaders I gave which changed their whole country (overthrowing colonialists and dictators) and completely reformed their country. Sorry Elamkulamm, you are a good guy but the good things you did does not outweigh Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro or Vladimir Lenin.Clara Zetkin:She was the instigator of the "United Front"policy which was adopted by the worldwide communist movement in 1921. This policy called for ALL parties to band together and demand better rights for the working classThis leaves me confused. The policy called for ALL parties to band together. Does this mean that every single political party in the world United for better workers rights? Or is it only one specific country? Or only communist parties worldwide? I request Con clarify.New Non bearded communists:Kim Jong Un: This guy needs no introduction.Con likes debating about leaders and their contribution to communism.Well, this man has gave communism's reputation such a scar that many people outright hate the ideology now, despite communism being about equality.His regime is currently the most oppresive, absolutist authoritarian regime in the world. This man has abused communism greatly for his own personal gains.There are many stories of extreme repression for example, it is against the law to watch south korean tv. One woman was forced to drown her baby for watching a forbidden soap opera (probably south korean tv). 3 generations of family members are sentenced to life imprisonment if you commit 'crimes'.[3][4]Kim Jong Un is not the only one, there are his predecessors Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il with the same barbaric policies. These 3 rulers of North Korea ruled it in the name of commnism and spat on its principles. They did bring equality to the masses however, oh yes they did. Abject poverty to everyone (its equal but completely unacceptable).These 3 are worse than even Stalin in their human rights abuses, not to mention their taking advantage of and degrading communism itself.No wonder the USSR was not very friendly to them. Only the non bearded Maoist China, supported (and still supports) their terrible regime. Sources:[1]http://www.theguardian.com...[2]http://ecowatch.com...[3]http://www.dailymail.co.uk...[4]http://listverse.com...End Note:Unfortunately it seems many communist leaders did not have beards, I have failed to find any more communist leaders with beards who were leaders. I could include Trotsky and Guevara, but they are not really 'leaders' as I described. However Con may argue against them if he wishes since there are only 3 on the bearded side.I await Con's response and remind him that this is his last chance to make new arguments and add new leaders to both my side and his, since no new arguments in round 4 as specified by the rules. (also clarify the Emma Goldman thing, elaborate)sorry if I seemed too provacative. :)