Communism is possible

I will address the arguments with tags, in order of the RD 2 posting. I thank my opponent for his response, and look forward to the final round :) I ran out of characters in RD 1 for the proper thank yous and whatnot. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On instinct (clarification of my position): My opponent fundamentally misunderstands the argument I'm making in terms of instinct, especially in terms of stratification. We didn't emulate the behavior of other animals—we are an animal, and animals all have the instinct to stratify. Stratification is a part of survival, as is socialization. My opponent also disregards all of my analysis that actually validates the stratification argument. Allow me to reiterate: 1. Stratification does not have to be negative. Animals other than human beings don't tend to oppress. They simply establish an order, with survival-related duties, and are able to work cooperatively to achieve a desired end, which is the survival of the entire community. Stratification does not have to be a servant to self-love, as my opponent asserts. Greed and superiority are not the same as natural herd stratification. Don't allow him to equate the two. 2. I never wanted us to disregard the teachings of men like Marx. In fact, I specifically stated in RD 1 that there are pieces of profound truth to communist theory that we should be integrating into our political and social realities. However, I still maintain that a society without any sort of stratification is an impossibility, simply because stratification is a survival tool utilized by all members of the animal kingdom. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On stratification and its characterization (important extension here): My opponent severely overestimates my conception of stratification. I don't believe I was unclear prior, but if I was, I apologize. Capitalism, in and of itself, does not encourage any of the harms that my opponent or Marx accuse it of. In fact, as I stated in RD 1, all governments are liable to these shortcomings, as all governments are made of a mixed bag of people. Until humans are homogeneously altruistic, Communism can't work. This is a key point that I want the voters to extend, as my opponent and Marx fail to take human differentiation into account. Capitalism operates within the realm of observed human behavior while giving humanity room to grow into more altruistic tendencies (as Capitalism uses these behaviors and instincts to benefit the entire community—see Adam Smith). Communism requires that all of its followers be uniformly virtuous from the beginning, which is purely unrealistic. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On self-interest (my opponent's same tag line): Self-love, as Adam Smith calls it, keeps the butcher being a butcher. My opponent has yet to clearly articulate how goods and services would be exchanged within a Communist system while not creating the stratification that I say is necessary to keep a society functioning at equilibrium. If the butcher can do something easier and still receive the same amount of goods or services in return, then the butcher will choose the easier profession. This is not a categorically true scenario, but it is highly realistic. While societies have made some misjudgments and mistakes regarding which professions deserve more merit than others, this is yet another moment where pieces of communist theory might temper the functioning of a Capitalist system. However, if I am to receive no merit for spending 10 years in medical school, racking up debts and killing myself for the benefit of society, why should I be a brain surgeon? Again, my opponent assumes that all people can or will be homogeneous in their altruism, which is simply untrue. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ On "rotten apples": My opponent is making categorical assertions about Capitalism based on some of its misapplication in the world. Not every capitalist society operates in this fashion. Capitalism is a spectrum of application, and this is just more evidence as to why Communism can't work. Capitalism at least accounts for human differentiation and arms people with tools to fight back against the "rotten apples." Since my opponent enjoys making generalizations about existing governments, I'll make one in turn: all manifestations of Communism have degenerated into Socialism. Why? The reason is because the naivete of the theory makes it supremely simple to dupe an entire population into dictatorship. The fact that multiple forms of Capitalism have succeeded in the world while Communism has not, after multiple attempts, suggests that education cannot overcome all. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- On proletariat revolution & oppressor vs. oppressed (key extension here): 1. Marx really does advocate the entire overthrow of the current social system. He says this directly in his manifesto. I can quote it if my opponent would like me to do so. 2. The French Revolution is precisely the sort of thing that Freire was talking about, so I'm not sure how my opponent, who is a student of Communist theory, can simply shrug off my comparison. While the French Revolution wasn't ever meant to instill Communism, it is a direct, historical example of the oppressed becoming extreme oppressors. Rather than simply eliminating the current social order via the head of state, the middle & lower class uprising felt it necessary to murder thousands of nobles, as well, most of whom merely held a title higher than the revolutionaries'. Even Freire, a passionate Communist and Marxist, admits that this is an incredibly dangerous result of Proletariat uprisings. And the French Revolution isn't the only time we've seen this result. Look to Sub-Saharan Africa, as well as much of South America. 3. While violence and the switching of superiority may contradict Communism's ultimate goal, that doesn't mean it won't happen. My opponent entirely drops all arguments I make for the necessity of retribution within humanity's schema of justice, which is huge to my advocacy. The reason the roles tend to switch is because of our need for retributive justice, which is another human trait seen unadulteratedly around the world. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ In summation, my opponent has still not been able to prove that Communism, as Marx envisioned it, can actually exist for any amount of time. I remind voters that he must prove that human beings can be uniformly altruistic, and that human beings do not need natural stratification in order to survive. Also, I want to especially highlight the problems Communism has with retributive justice. Since my opponent did not address this, I encourage you to weigh this heavily in the round.