Communism

"I This is somewhat of an off topic argument but still, wikipedia is a perfectly legitimate source. You cannot prove it is wrong, facts are facts." I will advice you to look at this http://www.debate.org... ".II The fact of the matter is all your argument is based around on is that my facts are incorrect. You attempt to provide sources but they really don't prove your points at all, so really arguing sources is stupid quite frankly." My opponent argues that arguing on sources is stupid; however a look into his previous arguments reveals the fact that he did not provide me with a case in which I could attack. He simply makes or provides simple sentences leaving me to base my knowledge on his stance on the citations provided. If my opponent is troubled by my attacks on the citations he provided, then I advice him to give to me his case showing his stance on the subject. Simply giving me a sentence or two does not provide me with enough to base your position on. " the other thing is it is impossible to say that humans need freedom of speech, private lives, etc. etc. Why is all that neccassary? It can end up costing lives and promoting black markets. Communism does none of that because a market is not neccasary, it is about power to the people" "Yes, if you want no crime you need to oppress the population" There is no such thing as no crime. With or without oppression, crime will still exist. In fact, it is more likely for crime to exist in a place lacking liberty as the nation feels the necessity to provide for itself what the government failed to provide for them whether legally or not. http://www.time.com... My opponent seems to misunderstand the concept of communism. Communism is not power to the people, but power to the government. With power to the government, we find that the nation is oppressed by the government costing them all basic freedom. My opponent argument that a black market does not exist with communism, is not correct. Like proven in my previous arguments, communism in history has led to poverty and with poverty comes desperation. Desperation leads to crime as a nation crushed by economic instabilities is now looking for a place to get an item for a cheaper price. Desperation leads to the lack of care for consequences. "I said without a larger police force and army human trafficking is harder to control." A larger police force is not a proven solution to crime. In fact, it is more likely for a larger police force to contribute to crime as it is easier for a larger police force to get corrupted than a smaller police force. A larger police force is less likely to value integrity as it is less regulated. "officers from small agencies are more likely to view the discipline processes of their agency as fair when compared to officers from larger agencies" http://www.nationalpoliceresearch.org... please carefully read the evidence provided. " And the USSR played a massive role in the economy it was a superpower." While this might be true, we also find that they only enjoyed this super power for a short period of time before crumbling first by the hands of internal force, then corruption, and the International force. With democracy, we find that not only is Russia more economically stable, but it now holds a quite powerful position globally, in the EU as well as UN. My opponent low crime rate is supported by a Wikipedia article. Please weigh that with my times article and see which is more reliable. I await my opponent' response.