This house believes that Stalin was not a socialist

I apologize if I have not provided the link for the definition. In this rebuttal, the link for the definition is in the references (number 8) 1. 'Communist: "a person who believes in communism or is a member of a political party that supports communism" Stalin was a member of a "Communist party. " The party was called "The Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU)" which was founded by Lenin. This proves that Stalin fits the definition of communist. ' I believe you are referring to the Bolshevik party[1]. The communist party was an executive branch, formed after the russian civil war in 1921. Stalin may have been a communist by definition, however, his policies were not in line with marxist socialist theory. Socialist and communist are not synonymous. [2] I admit, the debate topic was wrongfully worded. I should have called it 'Stalin's economic and social policies were not in line with marxist-socialist theory' 2. Here my opponent admits that Stalin "used Communist imagery and ideology. " Sounds like something a Communist would do. Again, Stalin was, by official definition, a communist. As I stated above, the name of the debate was constructed in a fallacious manner. I apologize. 3. Fredrick Engels, is known as the "father of Marxist theory, together with Karl Marx. "He also co-authored the communist manifesto. "Friedrich Engels condemned homosexuality in association with pedophilia. " This clearly separates ones view on homosexuality from socialism/communism as Lenin and Engels are both accepted as iconic figures who were socialist/communists, and had opposing views. This argument is negated. Fredrick Engels lived in a time when homosexuality was widely believed to be a disease. Stalin lived in a time when such prejudices could already have been abandoned. Karl Marx is widely believed to be the father of socialism. Frederick Engels did not write Das Kapital or Critique of the Gotha program after all. Karl Marx was a strong supporter of homosexual rights. Karl Ulrichs and Karl Marx were both for homosexual emancipation. [3] 4. Humorously, when you look up "collective farming" it has direct ties to Communism. Kim Jong Il who is also a communist, has implemented "collective farming" in North Korea. The same is true of Fidel Castro in Cuba. This shows my opponents arguments to be inconsistent with communism. You cannot logically say Stalin is not a communist for this, but Kim Jong Il, and Fidel Castro are in spite of this. I was not referring to collective farming in general, I was referring to the Stalinist model of collective farming. It is true, Kim Jong Il was not a communist. Like it or not, the DPRK practices Juche (an ideology completely separate from marxism). [4] 5. So far as I can tell, my opponent"s argument here is that no communist nation can be imperialistic. Again I invite Pro to provide sources to back this claim and until such time should be regarded as hearsay. I never stated that no communist nation can be imperialistic. Karl Marx was strongly opposed to imperialism and called it 'part of the prehistory of capitalist mode of production'[5] 6. Pro say"s "On 22 May 1943, Stalin announced the formal shutting-down of the Communist International, the association of revolutionary socialist parties across the world set up after the October Revolution. " I invite pro to elaborate as to why this would make Stalin not a socialist/communist as right now this is a statement without an application to the argument. The Comintern was created for spreading communist ideals and general goodwill on earth. It was the global branch of communism. However, I would be willing to abandon this argument if con finds it to be fallacious. 7. "Vladimir Lenin popularized political Vanguardism as conceptualized by Karl Kautsky, detailing his thoughts in one of his earlier works, What is to be done? . Lenin argued that Marxism"s complexity and the hostility of the establishment (the autocratic, semi-feudal state of Imperial Russia,) required a close-knit group of individuals pulled from the working class vanguard to safeguard the revolutionary ideology within the particular circumstances presented by the Tzarist regime at the time. "It seems that it could be argued that Stalin implemented the idea of a "Vanguard. " This is at its roots a socialistic/communistic principle. Con's source seems to defeat his argument. 'In theory, the revolutionary vanguard is not intended to be an organization separate from the working class, that attempts to place itself at the center of the movement and steer it in a direction consistent with its own ideology. It is instead intended to be an organic part of the working class that comes to socialist consciousness as a result of the dialectic of class struggle. ' The revolutionary vanguard was not meant to be the elite. [6] 8. Again if you compare to Cuba and North Korea to Stalin"s Russia, they are very similar in regard to class distinction, currency, and state controlled means of production. Your reference, sir? Also, as stated above, North Korea is not based on marxism. Juche is completely seperate from Marxism. Cuba is a completely different regime, created in completely different circumstances. This would be a debate for another day. Marxist theory proposes WORKER controlled means of production, which was later 'translated' as the state by Lenin. [7] Criticism of criticism: Socialism: ": a way of organizing a society in which major industries are owned and controlled by the government rather than by individual people and companies" Pro did not provide a source for his definition of socialism. The definition above is taken from Merriam-Webster. I present this as my opponent"s definition uses the words "community" while the dictionary uses "government" in reference to who controls the means of production. If my opponent could clarify the difference between the two and why his definition for one reason or another should be preferred over the dictionaries, it would add some clarity and authority to the debate. It seems most of pro"s argument would rest on this distinction. Also as we do want to avoid the "no true Scotsmen" fallacy it would be appropriate for Pro to give an example of somewhere or someone who is a "true" communist/socialist. Summary of rebuttals: Stalin fits the definition of communist found in the dictionary. Stalin cannot be excluded as a socialist/communist for collective farming as Kim Jong Il and Fidel Castro have also implemented this practice. Stalin seems to have implemented Lenin"s idea of Vanguardism to its natural application. Many of Pro"s statements are hearsay, as he did not provide sources to back these claims. After examination of my opponent"s argument that Stalin is not a "true" socialist/communist, it becomes clear that he is as much a socialist/communist as Kim Jong Il or Fidel Castro are "true" socialist/communists. The resolution is negated. My dear con, the definition was taken from an entirely different source . [8] Marxist theory states that the workers should control the means of production. Sure, you could make the claim that no nation was truly socialist if that is the standard. That could be a debate for another day. It is true that almost no nation in history has followed marxist theory to the letter, however, Stalinism doesn't even keep to the core tenets. I'm not arguing that Stalin wasn't a communist, I'm arguing that he wasn't a socialist. The second reference should explain the difference. [1]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [2]. http://asianhistory.about.com... [3]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [4]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [5]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [6]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [7]. http://en.wikipedia.org... [8]. http://dictionary.reference.com...