Instigator / Pro
7
1518
rating
1
debates
100.0%
won
Topic
#4024

Capitalism Advanaces Society

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
3
0
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

LibertyIsTheBestPolicy
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
2
Time for argument
One day
Max argument characters
10,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
4
1587
rating
182
debates
55.77%
won
Description

No information

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better legibility
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

PRO fails to provide definitions, set burden of proof, or the wincons for PRO and CON. Such provision is the responsibility of the instigator and oversight of those responsibilities leaves a big opportunity open for the the contender to exploit.

PRO presents several points in favor of capitalism as an economic system. PRO suggests that capitalism promotes innovation, which can improve healthcare and make products cheaper and more available. PRO also argues that capitalism has helped to reduce poverty around the world and has decentralized wealth from governments and oligarchs. PRO cites Adam Smith's concept of the invisible hand to suggest that individual self-interest leads to overall societal benefit. PRO contends that capitalism promotes free trade, which can drive economic growth and reduce global poverty.

CON wisely defines terms, burdens, and wincon but I think CON misses a big opportunity to qualify PRO's burden. That is, showing that Capitalism advances society to some degree in some situations is a very low burden to meet and conventional wisdom (at least in the West) gives PRO a powerful advantage. PRO's failure to define gave CON an oppotunity to set PRO's burden much higher- that in the aggregate, the advances of Global Society outpace the impediments imposed on that society by Free Trade- a much, much higher pole to vault.

CON argues that capitalism has been associated with unemployment and has contributed to economic downturns like the Great Depression. It is also true that some companies and individuals have taken advantage of their employees or exploited resources for their own profit, and that this can have negative consequences for workers and the environment. These are important issues that should be considered when evaluating the impact of capitalism but CON arguement feels like mere problem-finding rather than actually comparing Capitalist economies to non-Capitalist ecomies and demonstrating superior employment numbers, less exploitation, etc in those economies.

In R2, PRO does a good job of setting aside CON's complaints and making a case for the big picture." I never said capitalism was perfect and ensures absolute progress, the thesis was that capitalism advances society." I particularly like PRO's offering of specific examples Capitalist Venezuala rejected capitalism and went into retrograde: Communist China embraced capitalism and rapidly advanced. I really, really wish PRO had backed these examples with solid objective sourcing that directly linked capitalism to progress.

CON stuck with specific drawbacks in R2 and never really went to the heart of the wincon: societal advancement. Sure, desalination might pollute but does such innovation and big water projects lead to societal advancement overall? PRO say yes, CON never really makes a case against. CON's example of slave trade furthers his exploitation argument but I think weakens his unemployment argument: no slaves are ever unemployed. Is slavery only a feature of Capitalist economies? No, of course it isn't. I think CON's last point on environmental stress had great potential: sure the Industrial Revolution made us all less poor but if Earth becomes uninhabitable as a result, the society was let down.

Both sides had points but PRO got away with a very low bar to achieve: Capitalism advances society. PRO did show that the terrible scourge of human poverty has been improved and that increased innovation has a track record for solving problems that come up, even problems created by capitalism.

Arguments to PRO. Good, if sometimes subjective sourcing on both sides. Excellent grammer and conduct all around. Well done.