Communism is an ineffective system and should be abolished

Before I start my rebuttal I'm just going to go ahead and ask about why you want the definition of abolished and what problems you have with "abandoned". I find it absolutely unnecessary that you bring up such self-evident statements. My opponent has made a false assumption about my position. Pro is certainly not proposing any alternative to communism, he is merely suggesting that it is not an effective system of government. Pro has made it explicit that "I defend one major contention" take note of the word "defend" not "propose" defend. Now, with this in mind, does it not seem illogical that con has openly gone against capitalism? From this premise that con has already committed a straw-man and has demonstrated his inability to make valid contributions to the debate I will attempt to actually refute con's refutations. 1. Con has tried to explain that economy is actually not important to the functioning of society. However, he also states that "society functions dependent on itself" and that "humans maintain it" he goes on to assert that "if either dependency were to be interrupted we would be left in a state of absolute chaos." I agree completely, which is precisely why I find Con's argument so confusing. Taking into account that money or any other item of trade is necessary to purchase food and that society depends on food I believe that it is absolutely obvious that for people to maintain society they must have money to feed it. Thus, the economy and ergo its economic growth is paramount to the maintenance of the aforementioned society. Con then goes on to ask the question "Is a society that values the economy over its people even a society?" Pro would sincerely like to know where Con has gotten the idea that valuing one's economy is i)An obstacle to valuing one's people ii)A problem in any context. The economy is FUNDAMENTAL to nations. Is Con proposing that people are somehow not interconnected with the economy? This is clearly false, it is clear to me that to value one's economy IS to value one's people. Is it not valuing one's people to sustain one's economy so that the people may feed themselves???? 2) One cannot merely state that "corruption won't exist" in the face of overwhelming evidence which suggests that the Russian, Romanian and Chinese party members lived in greater luxury than their people. Unless of course these nations were "not true communists". Another problem is Con's belief that "the state will not exist" A state is "a politically unified people occupying a definite territory; nation." Whenever this body is not present one will form to occupy the vacuum. To say that it is possible for a state not to exist shows lack of historical knowledge. If Con can give me an example of complete anarchy with no power structures over a specific period of time I will by happy to concede this point. 3)This is again absolutely preposterous. Statehood MUST exist. Nowhere in history has this been demonstrated to be otherwise, it is IMPOSSIBLE for power structures to be removed. As I have addressed in round one your argument stems from an incorrect assumption popularized by Jean Jacques Rousseau and his book "The good savage" which claims that all evil residing within us is a product of our circumstances. Essentially this is what communism is built around and I will now prove that it is absolutely false. Humans are biological products, we evolve due to natural selection, certain animals kill their young ,we share ancestors with these animals., ergo we are capable of killing our young. We are not good. Taking this into consideration I ask the following: does con believe that a society without a state may exist and survive and prevail in the face of human nature. Does Con believe that new states will not fill the void and that power structures will not be constructed and that societies will distribute goods after the removal of said power structures and said states. 4. Refuted in #3. 5. People ARE the problem. We are sinners, we are not good beings. In authoritarian systems such as the early Islamic Caliphates we observe that mathematics and science flourished. This is not because of the system but because of the citizens. Nations reflect their people and their prosperity or lack of prosperity is reflective of said people. The #1 problem with communism is that it assumes that the system is the problem and that people are all good. THIS IS WRONG, WRONG, WRONG! Communism is the perfect system in a perfect world, however, we do not live in a perfect world. We live in a world motivated by greed and ambition! I'm so sorry, I wish we didn't. I really do. I'm sorry to burst your bubble and to perhaps be the first to tell you this but we do not live in a perfect world. I'm sorry, I really am. D: