Capitalism

This is of course my rebuttals to pro's round 3 arguments, in case people are lost.I don't see why Winston Churchill's opinion on the matter matters. He was a very far right-wing politician, so of course he will say socialism is terrible, as he has an innate bias in favor or supporting capitalist businesses. You quoting Churchill would be like as if I quoted Friedrich Engels on the problems with capitalism. Both are biased, and instead, we should rely on factual information and not quotes from people. In a socialist society, a man or woman is forced into a system in which they are simply given money way below any sort of living wage and don't earn by working and have their money taken if they make without government "assistance". -Cat47 This isn't true though, considering if it was, pvoerty rates would be sky-rocketing in socialist nations, but as I pointed out in previous rounds, poverty rates are decclining vastly in socialist nations. In other words, the facts don't support this claim and it is unsubstantiated.Thousands of immigrants flee socialist countries each year, for example, Cuba. More details in the sources at the bottom of this argument. -cat47Well, I would also personally flee Cuba if I lived there, and not because it is socialist, but because it is totalitarian. Being a libertarian socialist myself, I would rather live in a libertarian society, preferably a socialist libertarian society. I imagine the primary reasons people flee cuba more has to do with it being totalitarian than being socialist. Simply because people flee from that nation, doesn't mean it's because it is socialist, as there can be other reasons. Other socialist nations don't have nearly as much of an emigration problem as Cuba."A socialist system promises "free" everything. There is no such thing as say "free college", the government pays for you to go to college. Sounds good, but it causes debt." -cat47A socialist system doesn't necessarily promise this, actually. It's not something inherent to socialism. The only thing inherent to socialism is Democratic ownership of the means of production, which can be achieved through: Public ownership of the means of production, or cooperative ownership of the means of production. Socialism can be achieved without any social programs, a welfare state, or government intervention in the economy. None of those things are inherent to socialism. There are forms of socialism with those things, but socialism doesn't have to be implemented with those things. For example, libertarian socialism sometimes doesn't even have a government(sometimes it can be an anarchist society) and anarcho-syndicalism(syndicalism is another form of socialism in which workers' unions control the means of production and the union leaders are elected by the workers) wouldn't have a government either. So, there is no government in those socialist systems to provide these "free" things that my opponent suggests. In case you need a real-life example of a libertarian socialist or anarcho-syndicalist society, Revolutionary Catalonia during the Spanish civil war was one such society who was anarcho-syndicalist.As for your point that it causes debt, it only causes debt if taxes or tarrifs are not raised or if expenditures elsewhere are not decreased in order to pay for the government-funded university education. As for all of my opponents rebuttals to generic anti-capitalist arguments, I don't think I need to address any of them since I didn't make any of those arguments, or I don't think I did. I guess I'll comment on a few of my opponent's rebuttals:The socialist system sees people with other views as cogs in amoral government interests. Also, I'm starting to think he should have titled his little blog "10 Reasons To Hate Corporatism". -Cat47I don't see how this argument only applies to corporatism. Capitalism is the private ownership of the means of production, so a capitalist naturally undermines cooperation because they prevent the cooperative ownership of the means or production by owning their own business for themselves. That has nothing to do with corporatism, that is capitalism.This guy thinks that business advertising is "government propaganda"... Also, North Korea, a socialist country, has killed people for not listening to government propoganda, requires people to listen to propaganda on radios, and all sort of music and television legalized in North Korea must glorify it's murderous regime. -cat47Again, North Korea is a totalitarian socialist state. All totalitarian regimes, whether right-wing or left-wing, tend to instill their population with propaganda and they limit opposing opinions. This is a problem that deals with authoritarianism(where totalitarianism is absolute/extreme authoritarianism) versus libertarianism(where anarchy is the extreme of libertarianism). The United States is an authoritarian country, it's not totalitarian of course, but it is authoritarian. For example, the government sets education standards, and there is a clear bias in the history, government, and economics classes in schools against socialism. I never learned much about revolutionary Catalonia, or the Free Territory of Ukraine in school, yet both were socialist nations which were the opposite of totalitarian. It's as though schools only teach the totalitarian aspect of socialism in order for us to think that is the only kind of socialism out there and make us opposed to it. Only an authoritarian state would leave things out and try to paint an opposing ideology in a negative light. So, America does similar things in its education system, where it paints some things as good and others as evil. Capitalism is not a form of "ocracy" or "archy" and this is another example of people who know absolutely nothing about capitalism comparing it to facism. That didn't seem to compare capitalism to fascism actually, they just stated that capitalists would turn to forms of fascism in response to the people using a democratic vote to undermine the capitalist. And they didn't call capitalism a form of government like a "ocracy" or "archy" as you called it, it would do good to re-read that argument. However, capitalism does still have a form of government to it, as it's the business owner who controls their business and orders their employees around. The businessowner governs over their employees and business. It is a form of government on a very decentralized level. They govern over you in an economic way. The state governs over us in a political and legal way, and organized religion governs over us in a moral and religious way.