I need 20 questions to ask a socialist/communist

[Rael]

As part of a project for school I have to interview someone who is the opposite from me, so I am going to interview a socialist or communist. I have to ask them 20 questions that focus on what makes them an opposite from a libertarian (me)

"Create 20 questions for this person to answer. These questions should focus on what makes them your opposite. This is your attempt to understand why they communicate the way that they do. For instance, a technology enthusiast might ask the technology phobic, what is your favorite piece of technology that you own and why?"

I would like to get some suggestions. What questions would you ask a socialist/communist?

[Young Paleocon]

So when did you first realize you were an emotional, confused, moron?

[Jeremy]

When and why did you come to the conclusion that you would be a socialist?

[AmericaFyeah92]

-Have you read animal farm?

-Have you read 1984?

(it would be more prudent to ask these to communists since Orwell himself was a democratic socialist)

[Young Paleocon]

You know Hitler was a socialist right? :)

[Young Paleocon]

How would you define freedom? Liberty?

[Andrew-Austin]

Just read/listen to critiques of socialism and communism on mises.org, and you will get butt loads of good questions to ask.



Withering away of the state:
Term used intially by the German collaborator of Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels (1820-1895).

After the seizure of power by the working class, the dictatorship of the proletariat will be used to abolish capitalism and, hence, classes.

Since states only exist to regulate class conflict, the state will thereafter be redundant and will wither away.

http://www.politicsprofessor.com/politicaltheories/withering-away-of-the-state.php

I'm too lazy to figure out how to word/pose the question properly but...

Ask him how communism could possibly exist/come about without a monolithic government to force it on people. How the fuck is the State supposed to eventually just "wither away"? His answer would have to presume that humans are just 'clay without any essential nature' (I've heard a Marxist professor say this personally), and the denial of natural economic laws.

[Jeremy]

What do you believe the purpose of government is?

[micahnelson]

1) What is the strongest point to defend your beliefs?
2) What is the most difficult question to answer that you commonly receive regarding your economic views?
3) Is your way of thinking the best method for saving our economy, and why?
4) Define wealth in terms of the individual, and in terms of a nation.
5) What is the biggest obstacle to the realization of communism in America?
6) Who or what determines that value of a product or service today?
7) Who or what SHOULD determine the value?
8) What is the greatest example of communism working in the world?
9) What is the greatest example of its failure?
10) How important is economic policy, compared to other government policies such as civil rights, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc?

[humanic]

Where do rights come from?

[Young Paleocon]

Under Communism or Socialism what is the incentive for people to work? Do you think competitive business in America has led to the evolution of products and an increased standard of living? If so, why is capitalism attacked in the vague name of "social justice?"

Do you believe in a Natural Law or Order?

If health care is a right, wouldn't that mean you have a right to a doctor? If so, wouldn't that technically make the doctor a slave via compulsion?

[Conza88]

Do you own your body? Is it your property?

If they say no... hit them in the fucken face. Then when they get pissed, tell them you'll apologise to the owner when you see them. :rolleyes:

Are you a voluntary of coercive socialist? (They are coercive and dunno wtf you mean by it) if they say voluntary, then you ask - so you believe people have a right to property then?

- Kind of goes against what socialism is about, does it not? Abolition of property?

Maybe ask, 'Property is what creates civilization, voluntary social cooperation comes about by the division of labour.' Why do you want to get rid of several centuries of progress?

- Since communism is Utopian, and requires a change in human nature. How do you think you will bring this about?

- Do you believe in the use of violence to achieve your objectives? Isn't that immoral?

- You do realise Marx attacked mercantilism and not capitalism? What is stopping you from getting a good idea, getting a loan and making money by providing services to others.

- Who gets exploited in this situation: I want a home, you want to sell yours. We negotiate a price and come to a deal. You value the money more than the house, and I value the house more than the money. We would not do the deal, unless we thought we were better off.

Who is "exploited" in this situation. I may have sold the house for more than I bought it, or I may have sold it for less. Value is subjective.

- The main proponent of Marxism is the Labor theory of value. For instance, I spend the same amount of time and labor, painting a picture. In the same room, with the same equipment and utensils, time and labor - so is Picasso.

According to Marx, our paintings are worth the same. They have the same value.

Do you agree with this?

And if they say yes... hit them in the fcken face. :rolleyes:

[TER]

What are the bad things about socialism?

(and then let them list them for you)

[DirtMcGirt]

Is giving back most,if not all of your wages back to the state for them to distribute as they see fit a form of slavery?

[AutoDas]

I would refrain from asking biased and loaded questions as it will most likely backfire because you seem to ask way too many questions to be even ready to defend capitalism.

[Rael]

Thanks so much for the suggestions folks. I chose 20 of your questions. I'll get back to you on the answers I get=P

[Josh_LA]

1) To what extent does a person have private property?
2) Can society decide who gets to live or die?
3) Should distribution of wealth be decided by an elite, or by the masses?
4) Is anything unjustifiable with statistics?
5) Why should people work if we can afford to pay them to do nothing?
6) Is laziness a virtue?
7) Is altruism a virtue? If so, is suicide admirable?
8) If poverty is bad, is killing the poor a solution?

[Conza88]

I would refrain from asking biased and loaded questions as it will most likely backfire because you seem to ask way too many questions to be even ready to defend capitalism.

Yes. You've got that right.

[Rael]

These are the questions I submitted and the response I got:

1. What is the strongest point to defend your beliefs?
2. What is the most difficult question to answer that you commonly receive regarding your economic views?
3. Is your way of thinking the best method for saving our economy, and why?
4. Define wealth in terms of the individual, and in terms of a nation.
5. What is the biggest obstacle to the realization of socialism in America?
6. What is the greatest example of socialism working in the world?
7. What is the greatest example of its failure?
8. How important is economic policy, compared to other government policies such as civil rights, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc?
9.Where do rights come from?
10.What do you believe the purpose of government is?
11.When and why did you come to the conclusion that you would be a socialist?
12 .Under Communism or Socialism what is the incentive for people to work?
13.Do you think competitive business in America has led to the evolution of products and an increased standard of living?
14. Do you believe in a Natural Law or Order?
15 If health care is a right, wouldn't that mean you have a right to a doctor? If so, wouldn't that technically make the doctor a slave via compulsion?
16. What is your view on private property?
17. Do you own your body? Is it your property?
18. Do you believe in the use of violence to achieve your objectives?
19. The main proponent of Marxism is the Labor theory of value. For instance, I spend the same amount of time and labor, painting a picture. In the same room, with the same equipment and utensils, time and labor - so is Picasso.According to Marx, our paintings are worth the same. They have the same value. Do you agree with this?
20. What do you think are negative aspects of socialism/communism?


Answers:
1. They're correct.
2. Why do you like rape?
3. Socialism sees the inherent flaws in our economy, and therefore wishes to replace it. With a socialist economy.
4. Wealth on an individual basis is measured in relation to the economy in which it is in. A man making $30k in El Salvador will be wealthy, whereas in the US that is a hard life. As far as nations go, everything from Canada on up.
5. A profound lack of critical thinking.
6. I can't say.
7. Germany, following the failure of the socialists to hold on to power following WWI.
8. Economic policy dictates all other policies in every country.
9. The power to prevent others from infringing on them.
10. To preserve the status of the ruling class. Which is why it should be abolished.
11. When I got my first paycheck.
12. So that work can be abolished.
13. Compared to the number of technologies the govt has developed, not really.
14. Yes, depending on us talking about the same thing.
15. If you live in the US you already have a right to a doctor if you have a legit medical issue which needs to be addressed (though it is not a satisfactory system, of course).
16. I have no problem with private property in many senses.
17. According to our government, no it's not. Otherwise I wouldn't be thrown in prison for putting substances they don't like into it.
18. Only if I am not allowed to achieve them peacefully.
19. No, the value of each painting is determined by the viewer (and you're distorting the LTV into something it is not. The LTV believes labor should be compensated fairly for the finished product. If you're finished product garners $5 then that is the value of your labor. Picasso's is worth ifinitely more, to be sure).
20. It's not here.

[Conza88]

LOL... so many non answers, Hegelian dialectic etc. Anyway, I'll respond, to the inane responses to my questions. (Thanks for posing them btw).

For eg. "The socialists proclaim the glory of the State, and the use of the State to abolish private property – for them the dilemma does not exist. The orthodox Marxist Communist, who pays lip service to the ideal of left-wing anarchy, resolves the dilemma by use of the Hegelian dialectic: that mysterious process by which something is converted into its opposite. The Marxists would enlarge the State to the maximum and abolish capitalism, and then sit back confidently to wait upon the State's "withering away." - Rothbard


"16. What is your view on private property?
17. Do you own your body? Is it your property?
18. Do you believe in the use of violence to achieve your objectives?
19. The main proponent of Marxism is the Labor theory of value. For instance, I spend the same amount of time and labor, painting a picture. In the same room, with the same equipment and utensils, time and labor - so is Picasso.According to Marx, our paintings are worth the same. They have the same value. Do you agree with this?"


16. I have no problem with private property in many senses.
17. According to our government, no it's not. Otherwise I wouldn't be thrown in prison for putting substances they don't like into it.
18. Only if I am not allowed to achieve them peacefully.
19. No, the value of each painting is determined by the viewer (and you're distorting the LTV into something it is not. The LTV believes labor should be compensated fairly for the finished product. If you're finished product garners $5 then that is the value of your labor. Picasso's is worth ifinitely more, to be sure).

16. No problem with private property? Marxism can be summed up in one phrase: (Communist Manifesto) "The abolition of private property." Looks like this guy ain't a marxist. lol >.<
17. Didn't answer the question. The question wasn't, "according to the govt, do you own your body"... you (pinko commi bastard) didn't answer the question. Fail.
18. LMAO. "violence is ok, if i can achieve my goals without violence" :confused:
19. "the value of each painting is determined by the viewer" OHHH, so it's subjective. :D :cool:

We win. ;)

[kojirodensetsu]

The person's answers didn't surprise me.

[Conza88]

Far worse and idiotic than expected.

Was he only allowed one sentence answers or something? Or he simply didn't care? Or thats the best he's got? :confused:

[Pennsylvania]

The Marxist-Leninist idea of the Vanguard Party refers to that group of people which would be responsible for defending the success of an achieved communist revolution. However, communist ideology ultimately seeks to turn complete power over the means of production into the hands of the people in common, thus power is transferred from a small elite, to the entire workforce. What reasons do you have to believe that the vanguard would ever relinquish this type and amount of control?

[Young Paleocon]

I'm interested in these technologies that the government has just churned out making our standard of living so high.

[M House]

There really isn't such thing as a commie. The government's just operated with a bit of an oligarchy plus extreme socialism.

[Pennsylvania]

Following a communist revolution, is it acceptable to hang people who do not hand over their food to you (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1951911&postcount=3)?

[M House]

That's messed up.

[mconder]

Are there any historical examples of socialist or communist states where the living standard of the average middle class citizen has ever surpassed the United States in it's pre-socialist era?

[M House]

I think that would be a hard comparison to make.

[M House]

I know under "communism" the USSR didn't exactly have equal distribution of wealth and everyone had the same living standard. Some people definitely had it better. Europe has some fairly wealthy socialist states still with decent living standard. However, you'll just have look thru each specific country. It's not like these systems are fantastic though. Neither would've been the good old days before "socialism" in the US. As soon as we got hit with industrial revolution we started getting a bit of that started here as well. What time frame are you looking at to compare by the way?

[Pennsylvania]

These were the responses that interested me:



9. The power to prevent others from infringing on them.


I 100% agree with him here.



12. So that work can be abolished.


loL!!!1

Okay I'll throw him a bone (it's obviously a him), and assume he's talking about wage labor, which still eliminates a large portion of working, demonstrable, capitalism-based incentives



13. Compared to the number of technologies the govt has developed, not really.


OMGz, someone call up john browning, ben franklin, johann gutenberg, alexander graham bell, thomas edison, nikola tesla, leonardo di vinci, the wright brothers, and robert fulton, and let them know they might as well have not even bothered, since eventually government would have got the job done anyway. :rolleyes:

[M House]

I don't really have a problem with government throwing some "wealth" at science. Though it's terribly inefficient, I'd much rather money be spent this way if they have to do it. Technology, science, and research tend to stand the test of time. I doubt we'd have the semi-conductors we do or much of aeronautics without large inflated sums of money. There might have another way of doing this however.

[David A. Gay, Sr.]

What do you believe concerning individual property rights?

What is your view on taxes?

Should a person be allowed to become rich off of their relative's inheritance? Why, or why not?

Should private citizens be allowed to own and operate guns?..bearing in mind, we're not refering simply to guns for hunting. Any type of gun...why or why not?

What role should the state play in health care?

What role should the state play in the economy?

Should the government itself ever be directly in charge of a business or industry?

This seems to conflict with the idea that the state should break up corporate monopolies...does it?

Don't you see the state as a large monopoly..and if so.. is this a favorable situation for the people?

THERE'S A FEW FOR YOU...

[David A. Gay, Sr.]

OMGz, someone call up john browning, ben franklin, johann gutenberg, alexander graham bell, thomas edison, nikola tesla, leonardo di vinci, the wright brothers, and robert fulton, and let them know they might as well have not even bothered, since eventually government would have got the job done anyway. :rolleyes:

We would still be lighting our houses with candles, listening exclusively to live performances, relying on sea and ground transportation, and calling each other from roof tops, and rubbing our heads on baloons for electricity. Not so bad.

KIDDING!

[Rael]

These are the comments I added to the paper


Q1. What is the strongest point to defend your beliefs?
A2: They're correct
Notice there is no attempt to use logic at all. Just, “They're correct.”


Q3. Is your way of thinking the best method for saving our economy, and why?
A3. Socialism sees the inherent flaws in our economy, and therefore wishes to replace it. With a socialist economy.
No attempt to explain why it is the best, of course.


Q5. What is the biggest obstacle to the realization of socialism in America?
A5. A profound lack of critical thinking.
This is so ironic it's almost hilarious. A lack of critical thinking is exactly what this person is demonstrating.

Q6. What is the greatest example of socialism working in the world?
A6. I can't say
Aha! This person cannot even provide an example to show where his ideology has worked!


Q10.What do you believe the purpose of government is?
A10. To preserve the status of the ruling class. Which is why it should be abolished.
Some Marxists actually claim that their goal is the abolishment of government, and this will come about eventually after a Marxist government is established.

Q11.When and why did you come to the conclusion that you would be a socialist?
A11. When I got my first paycheck.
Example of a knee jerk reaction. No attempt to be rational, he made a decision to support an ideology based on the fact that he felt he was not being paid enough.

Q12 .Under Communism or Socialism what is the incentive for people to work?
A12. So that work can be abolished.
Muahahaha! I actually laughed aloud when I read this.

Q13.Do you think competitive business in America has led to the evolution of products and an increased standard of living?
A13. Compared to the number of technologies the govt has developed, not really.
Baloney. Granted, some technologies have come about from government, particularly as a side effect of the space program. But this can in no way compare to the technologies private industry has developed. Market demand drives innovation, and governments do not respond to market demand.



Q15 If health care is a right, wouldn't that mean you have a right to a doctor? If so, wouldn't that technically make the doctor a slave via compulsion?
A15. If you live in the US you already have a right to a doctor if you have a legit medical issue which needs to be addressed (though it is not a satisfactory system, of course).
He ducks the question about whether the doctor is a slave.



Q18. Do you believe in the use of violence to achieve your objectives?
A18. Only if I am not allowed to achieve them peacefully.
This is the most important answer of all 20 questions. It demonstrates that socialists are willing to kill you in order to make things more “fair”. So far, communism has killed about 100 million people.
Most libertarians would probably give the same answer this person did. However, there is a huge difference. The libertarian believes violence should only be used defensively, that is to say, if someone threatened their life, liberty, or property. Because libertarianism does not ask others to take any action, merely to refrain from using violence or coercion to threaten their life, liberty, or property, a violent response from a libertarian to achieve his objective can only be defensive in nature. Since socialism relies on redistribution of wealth, the socialist is therefore willing to use violence upon you, if you refuse to give up your money or property. This is exactly the same behavior as an armed robber.

Q19. The main proponent of Marxism is the Labor theory of value. For instance, I spend the same amount of time and labor, painting a picture. In the same room, with the same equipment and utensils, time and labor - so is Picasso. According to Marx, our paintings are worth the same. They have the same value. Do you agree with this?
A19. No, the value of each painting is determined by the viewer (and you're distorting the LTV into something it is not. The LTV believes labor should be compensated fairly for the finished product. If you're finished product garners $5 then that is the value of your labor. Picasso's is worth infinitely more, to be sure).
This is absolutely wrong. He is describing the subjective theory of value, which is a cornerstone of libertarian economics, not the labor theory of value.

Q20. What do you think are negative aspects of socialism/communism?
A20. It's not here.
This shows the tunnel vision of the socialist. He is unable to acknowledge any faults in his system whatsoever. Even libertarianism has negative aspects. This is an example of a lack of critical thinking.

[Pennsylvania]

We would still be lighting our houses with candles, listening exclusively to live performances, relying on sea and ground transportation, and calling each other from roof tops, and rubbing our heads on baloons for electricity. Not so bad.

KIDDING!

Basically.

These socialists assume too much. They overlook that government achievements have been based on technological ideas developed at private higher education institutions such as MIT.

With socialism, valuable private education like that given at MIT is replaced with state education. It'll be infinitely harder for them to develop complex inventions after they've cut their own legs out from underneath them.

[Andrew-Austin]

These are the comments I added to the paper


Q5. What is the biggest obstacle to the realization of socialism in America?
A5. A profound lack of critical thinking.
This is so ironic it's almost hilarious. A lack of critical thinking is exactly what this person is demonstrating.

I'd comment: Your right there is a profound lack of critical thinking in America today, but that is why we are on the socialist road.




Q11.When and why did you come to the conclusion that you would be a socialist?
A11. When I got my first paycheck.
Example of a knee jerk reaction. No attempt to be rational, he made a decision to support an ideology based on the fact that he felt he was not being paid enough.

He wanted to force his employers to pay him more.



Q12 .Under Communism or Socialism what is the incentive for people to work?
A12. So that work can be abolished.
Muahahaha! I actually laughed aloud when I read this.

This combined with his answer from question 11 really helps you understand this person's mentality.



Q18. Do you believe in the use of violence to achieve your objectives?
A18. Only if I am not allowed to achieve them peacefully.
This is the most important answer of all 20 questions. It demonstrates that socialists are willing to kill you in order to make things more “fair”. So far, communism has killed about 100 million people.
Most libertarians would probably give the same answer this person did. However, there is a huge difference. The libertarian believes violence should only be used defensively, that is to say, if someone threatened their life, liberty, or property. Because libertarianism does not ask others to take any action, merely to refrain from using violence or coercion to threaten their life, liberty, or property, a violent response from a libertarian to achieve his objective can only be defensive in nature. Since socialism relies on redistribution of wealth, the socialist is therefore willing to use violence upon you, if you refuse to give up your money or property. This is exactly the same behavior as an armed robber.

Good commentary.

[georgiaboy]

Cool thread.

My question would've been: What shade of gray would you like your entire wardrobe and the rest of your government distributed possessions to be?

[Rael]

I am already using the other one in my report, but I did get another response

1. What is the strongest point to defend your beliefs?

For every severe problem that society has, capitalism either caused it outright, or, if it didn't entirely cause it, capitalism strongly magnified the intensity of it. Can anyone name any problem that society faces for which this isn't true?

2. What is the most difficult question to answer that you commonly receive regarding your economic views?

Socialists haven't discovered a way to persuade the working class majority act in their own genuine interests and change the system. All of the media, schools and religions are misleading us about what our true interests are. Most people tend to act habitually in ways that we have been told thousands of times since childhood are normal.

3. Is your way of thinking the best method for saving our economy, and why?

You don't "save" a worn out, broken down and thoroughly malfunctioning device. You scrap it and replace it with something new and better.

4. Define wealth in terms of the individual, and in terms of a nation.

Wealth is the result of exactly two things -- human labor, and nature's raw materials -- being mixed together. There are no other necessary components. The labor must be, of course, intelligent; that is, the word "labor" includes mental labor as well as physical labor. The textbook claim that you need the "entrepeneur" is nothing but a modern equivalent of the ancient priest claiming that a human society could never exist without an emperor or a king.

5. What is the biggest obstacle to the realization of socialism in America?

See my answer to question 2.

6. What is the greatest example of socialism working in the world?

and

7. What is the greatest example of its failure?

No one in the world has ever tried socialism before, that is, an industrial management system democratically controlled by the workers, either directly or through their honestly elected delegates.

8. How important is economic policy, compared to other government policies such as civil rights, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc?

It's not economic policy that's important, it's what kind of system, with a particular structure and form of organization, that's important. Economic policies will have to be determined after we have a viable economic system in the first place.

To speak of civil rights is an orthogonal discussion. No matter what economic system we have, bad or good, we need a political system with a strictly defended written constitution and body of laws that will protect civil rights.

To speak of foreign policy is nonsense to me because I believe that establishing a world government is essential for human survival.

9.Where do rights come from?

Right and wrong are figures of speech that indicate the state of mind of each speaker. If I strongly want to be in a situation in which something is likely to happen, I say that I have a "right" to it. If I strongly want a situation in which something probably won't happen, I say that the thing would be "wrong".

10.What do you believe the purpose of government is?

Assuming you mean government over individual behavior, its main purpose is to set limits, such as outlawing murder and assault. If you mean government in the general sense of adjusting anything, in the way that a thermostat governs temperature, etc., then I would include industrial management as a form of government -- it always and always will be, and the only question is what particular kind is preferable.

11.When and why did you come to the conclusion that you would be a socialist?

I was in my second year of high school. It was during the Vietnam War. I became a socialist abruptly, literally within fifteen minutes, after someone handed me a particular leaflet on the street, and I decided to read it with an open mind. Here's a transcript of that leaflet, which was an essay that was first written in 1960:

http://www.deleonism.org/text/ww-60.htm

12 .Under Communism or Socialism what is the incentive for people to work?

Getting paid by the hour to show up at work and put the time in. I disagree with those who include the abolition of the practice of earning income and spending it as being among the defining characteristics of socialism.

13.Do you think competitive business in America has led to the evolution of products and an increased standard of living?

No. I think there was a combination of three effects: (2) the U.S.A. happened to be founded in the post-Renaissance age in which human scientific knowledge was rapidly increasing and machinery was being invented, (2) the economic stimulus of capitalism being transplanted here from Europe, taking an entire continent of trees, fertile soil and untouched mineral deposits away from the native people by force, and (3) certain other geographical advantages, such as the number of major rivers and total coastal area. Therefore, for some working class people, but not all, the standard of living in the U.S. improved more rapidly than it did for workers in several other parts of the world.

14. Do you believe in a Natural Law or Order?

The laws of physics, yes. Cosmic rules that human society must live by, no.

15 If health care is a right, wouldn't that mean you have a right to a doctor? If so, wouldn't that technically make the doctor a slave via compulsion?

I say that health care is a right because I would like to have it. (See question 9).

To say that it makes the doctor a slave would be as absurd as saying that the workers who maintain the town reservoir are slaves because the people need drinking water, or the people who change the light bulbs in the street lamps are slaves because the people want lighting, or teachers are slaves because children need education. The singling out of the doctor in the wording of this question is suspicious. Could that be because doctors are relatively well-paid today, and the composer of the question is more concerned about the doctor's yacht than a hungry child's breakfast?

16. What is your view on private property?

It's a social convention, the same as whether we should spell a word "color" as in the U.S. or "colour" as in England. The people may decide to change such customary practices at any time.

17. Do you own your body? Is it your property?

That's a discussion about how to define some words. Editing dictionaries isn't my field of specialty.

18. Do you believe in the use of violence to achieve your objectives?

No. Once society has achieved the point where the people elect the law-makers, the entire battle of producing a social revolution is about finding some techniques to overcome the indoctination by the ruling class's media and schools, and to persuade a majority of the people to think differently about things. When the propagation of certain new ideas has been successful, the task is entirely done.

19. The main proponent of Marxism is the Labor theory of value. For instance, I spend the same amount of time and labor, painting a picture. In the same room, with the same equipment and utensils, time and labor - so is Picasso.According to Marx, our paintings are worth the same. They have the same value. Do you agree with this?

Your question is based on an incorrect assumption. The Marxian theory of value refers to commodies that are continuously produced and then marketed solely by generic category and quantity, such as bushels of corn, square yards of cotton linen, and tons of scrap iron, that is, the goods that economic theory calls "fungible commodities." There doesn't exist any marketplace for selling an endless supply of generic Picasso paintings by the ton or kilogram. If there were, then perhaps Marxian economics could be applied to that marketplace also.

20. What do you think are negative aspects of socialism/communism?

See question 2. Nothing else.

[Xenophage]

The person who answered your questions was intelligent, but he is epistemologically inconsistent and ethically irrational. He also likes to avoid difficult intellectual concepts by saying that the definitions of the words are wrong or meaningless, instead of dealing with them in a direct, literal manner. There are certainly better socialists out there :)

I would love to argue with him because our argument would get right back to the root of all philosophy: metaphysics.

[Xenophage]

You used the first response? That guy was an idiot, albeit funny as shit.

Comparing the two responders is like comparing Lex Luthor to one of his dimwitted assistants. The 2nd guy is Lex Luthor. Awesome! Now use your Logic Breath to blow him away!

[AutoDas]

I would ask these two socialists why don't they start their own commune. Oh wait, they did. The Wacos were all Marxists, the founder preached Marxism and they were drawn to it.

[Freedom 4 all]

These are the questions I submitted and the response I got:

1. What is the strongest point to defend your beliefs?
2. What is the most difficult question to answer that you commonly receive regarding your economic views?
3. Is your way of thinking the best method for saving our economy, and why?
4. Define wealth in terms of the individual, and in terms of a nation.
5. What is the biggest obstacle to the realization of socialism in America?
6. What is the greatest example of socialism working in the world?
7. What is the greatest example of its failure?
8. How important is economic policy, compared to other government policies such as civil rights, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc?
9.Where do rights come from?
10.What do you believe the purpose of government is?
11.When and why did you come to the conclusion that you would be a socialist?
12 .Under Communism or Socialism what is the incentive for people to work?
13.Do you think competitive business in America has led to the evolution of products and an increased standard of living?
14. Do you believe in a Natural Law or Order?
15 If health care is a right, wouldn't that mean you have a right to a doctor? If so, wouldn't that technically make the doctor a slave via compulsion?
16. What is your view on private property?
17. Do you own your body? Is it your property?
18. Do you believe in the use of violence to achieve your objectives?
19. The main proponent of Marxism is the Labor theory of value. For instance, I spend the same amount of time and labor, painting a picture. In the same room, with the same equipment and utensils, time and labor - so is Picasso.According to Marx, our paintings are worth the same. They have the same value. Do you agree with this?
20. What do you think are negative aspects of socialism/communism?


Answers:
1. They're correct.
2. Why do you like rape?
3. Socialism sees the inherent flaws in our economy, and therefore wishes to replace it. With a socialist economy.
4. Wealth on an individual basis is measured in relation to the economy in which it is in. A man making $30k in El Salvador will be wealthy, whereas in the US that is a hard life. As far as nations go, everything from Canada on up.
5. A profound lack of critical thinking.
6. I can't say.
7. Germany, following the failure of the socialists to hold on to power following WWI.
8. Economic policy dictates all other policies in every country.
9. The power to prevent others from infringing on them.
10. To preserve the status of the ruling class. Which is why it should be abolished.
11. When I got my first paycheck.
12. So that work can be abolished.
13. Compared to the number of technologies the govt has developed, not really.
14. Yes, depending on us talking about the same thing.
15. If you live in the US you already have a right to a doctor if you have a legit medical issue which needs to be addressed (though it is not a satisfactory system, of course).
16. I have no problem with private property in many senses.
17. According to our government, no it's not. Otherwise I wouldn't be thrown in prison for putting substances they don't like into it.
18. Only if I am not allowed to achieve them peacefully.
19. No, the value of each painting is determined by the viewer (and you're distorting the LTV into something it is not. The LTV believes labor should be compensated fairly for the finished product. If you're finished product garners $5 then that is the value of your labor. Picasso's is worth ifinitely more, to be sure).
20. It's not here.

Were those his actual answers, or a parody you created to make fun of him. If it was a parody, it's very funny. On the otherhand if those were his actual answers, it's both horrifying and hillarious. Critical thinking eh? Right back at you.

[Rael]

Were those his actual answers, or a parody you created to make fun of him. If it was a parody, it's very funny. On the otherhand if those were his actual answers, it's both horrifying and hillarious. Critical thinking eh? Right back at you.

Those are his real answers. here is the link to the thread I posted.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/questions-leftists-socialist-t101416/index.html

[PatriotLegion]

Q13.Do you think competitive business in America has led to the evolution of products and an increased standard of living?
A13. Compared to the number of technologies the govt has developed, not really.
Baloney. Granted, some technologies have come about from government, particularly as a side effect of the space program. But this can in no way compare to the technologies private industry has developed. Market demand drives innovation, and governments do not respond to market demand.


With out a free market/open competition there would be very few advancements in technology. Even during the space race Governments pumped monies to "private corporations" like Grumman/Lockheed-Martin but they were under contract by the US government. Even military technology is developed in a private enterprise but under strict Government contracts where the lowest bidder wins.

But without a free market there is no reason to compete because the State says that's what you can buy and that's it. A brush is a brush and that's all you need!

[Rael]

So far, this is my complete paper


Interview With The Socialist


February 11, 2009





For my contrast paper, I decided to interview a socialist. I am a libertarian, so I consider a socialist to be my ideological opposite(technically, the ideological opposite to a libertarian is a statist. A statist can be a socialist, fascist, moderate, or other ideologies, but this obviously creates too broad a pool to choose from). I use the term socialist and communist interchangeably here. Yes, there is a difference, but not a big enough difference for me to quibble over for the purposes of this paper.
I don't personally know any socialists (or at least, no one that would admit to being one), so I had to interview anyone I could find. I joined a socialist internet forum and posted my questions, and chose what I felt was the most relevant reply. So I can't say that I have a perception of this individual person, but I can explain my perception of the socialist in general.
Most advocates of any ideology can be broken down into two camps. On the one hand, we have the person who advocates his ideology for utilitarian reasons; that is to say, he thinks that his system will work better than others. On the other hand, we have the person who advocates their system from a natural law perspective, or because he thinks his system is morally just.
Socialists are overwhelmingly of the latter type. They advocate their system because they feel that it is fair. Most don't actually look beyond what they think will be the results of the policies they advocate. They only look at, and think about, the initial outcome. For example, when it comes to the minimum wage, the socialist only thinks about the person making minimum wage who gets a pay increase. She doesn't think about unintended consequences of the minimum wage increase, such as higher unemployment among inexperienced workers (particularly teenagers), who's economic value as a worker may be less than the minimum wage. There tend to be very few real utilitarian socialists, because it cannot be demonstrated that the system they advocate actually achieves the outcomes they expect, at least, not in a manner that stands up to intellectual scrutiny.
Therefore, socialists tend to be emotional people who are prone to knee jerk reactions. They may be well meaning, but because they tend to think with their hearts and not their heads, they invariably come to erroneous conclusions.
After conferring with some libertarian friends, I posed the following questions, and received replies from one person.





Questions And Answers

I include my reflections on some of the answers in bold. All answers are given verbatim, exactly as the person wrote them, with no correction for their grammar,spelling, or punctuation.

Q1. What is the strongest point to defend your beliefs?
A2: They're correct
Notice there is no attempt to use logic at all. Just, “They're correct.”

Q2. What is the most difficult question to answer that you commonly receive regarding your economic views?
A2. Why do you like rape?
I don't understand this answer, but whatever.

Q3. Is your way of thinking the best method for saving our economy, and why?
A3. Socialism sees the inherent flaws in our economy, and therefore wishes to replace it. With a socialist economy.
No attempt to explain why it is the best, of course.

Q4. Define wealth in terms of the individual, and in terms of a nation.
A4. Wealth on an individual basis is measured in relation to the economy in which it is in. A man making $30k in El Salvador will be wealthy, whereas in the US that is a hard life. As far as nations go, everything from Canada on up.

Q5. What is the biggest obstacle to the realization of socialism in America?
A5. A profound lack of critical thinking.
This is so ironic it's almost hilarious. A lack of critical thinking is exactly what this person is demonstrating.

Q6. What is the greatest example of socialism working in the world?
A6. I can't say
Aha! This person cannot even provide an example to show where his ideology has worked!

Q7. What is the greatest example of its failure?
A7. Germany, following the failure of the socialists to hold on to power following WWI.

Q8. How important is economic policy, compared to other government policies such as civil rights, foreign policy, domestic policy, etc?
A8. Economic policy dictates all other policies in every country.

Q9.Where do rights come from?
A9. The power to prevent others from infringing on them.

Q10.What do you believe the purpose of government is?
A10. To preserve the status of the ruling class. Which is why it should be abolished.
Some Marxists actually claim that their goal is the abolishment of government, and this will come about eventually after a Marxist government is established.

Q11.When and why did you come to the conclusion that you would be a socialist?
A11. When I got my first paycheck.
Example of a knee jerk reaction. No attempt to be rational, he made a decision to support an ideology based on the fact that he felt he was not being paid enough.

Q12 .Under Communism or Socialism what is the incentive for people to work?
A12. So that work can be abolished.
Muahahaha! I actually laughed aloud when I read this.

Q13.Do you think competitive business in America has led to the evolution of products and an increased standard of living?
A13. Compared to the number of technologies the govt has developed, not really.
Baloney. Granted, some technologies have come about from government programs, particularly as a side effect of the space program. However most of these technologies and others that are created from government programs are actually developed by private companies that the government outsources work to. And these instances can in no way compare to the technologies private industry has developed. Market demand drives innovation, and governments do not respond to market demand. Thomas Edison, A. Graham Bell, Benjamin Franklin, Henry Ford, and many others are examples of individuals from the private sector who created new technologies.

Q14. Do you believe in a Natural Law or Order?
A14. Yes, depending on us talking about the same thing.

Q15 If health care is a right, wouldn't that mean you have a right to a doctor? If so, wouldn't that technically make the doctor a slave via compulsion?
A15. If you live in the US you already have a right to a doctor if you have a legit medical issue which needs to be addressed (though it is not a satisfactory system, of course).
He ducks the question about whether the doctor is a slave.

Q16. What is your view on private property?
A16. I have no problem with private property in many senses.

Q17. Do you own your body? Is it your property?
A17. According to our government, no it's not. Otherwise I wouldn't be thrown in prison for putting substances they don't like into it.

Q18. Do you believe in the use of violence to achieve your objectives?
A18. Only if I am not allowed to achieve them peacefully.
This is the most important answer of all 20 questions. It demonstrates that socialists are willing to kill you in order to make things more “fair”. So far, communism has killed about 100 million people.
Most libertarians would probably give the same answer this person did. However, there is a huge difference. The libertarian believes violence should only be used defensively, that is to say, if someone threatened their life, liberty, or property. Because libertarianism does not ask others to take any action, merely to refrain from using violence or coercion to threaten their life, liberty, or property, a violent response from a libertarian to achieve his objective can only be defensive in nature. Since socialism relies on redistribution of wealth, the socialist is therefore willing to use violence upon you, if you refuse to give up your money or property. This is exactly the same behavior as an armed robber.

Q19. The main proponent of Marxism is the Labor theory of value. For instance, I spend the same amount of time and labor, painting a picture. In the same room, with the same equipment and utensils, time and labor - so is Picasso. According to Marx, our paintings are worth the same. They have the same value. Do you agree with this?
A19. No, the value of each painting is determined by the viewer (and you're distorting the LTV into something it is not. The LTV believes labor should be compensated fairly for the finished product. If you're finished product garners $5 then that is the value of your labor. Picasso's is worth infinitely more, to be sure).
This is absolutely wrong. He is describing the subjective theory of value, which is a cornerstone of libertarian economics, not the labor theory of value.

Q20. What do you think are negative aspects of socialism/communism?
A20. It's not here.
This shows the tunnel vision of the socialist. He is unable to acknowledge any faults in his system whatsoever. Even libertarianism has negative aspects. This is an example of a lack of critical thinking.

[Xenophage]

Man, that's the most fair and balanced piece of reporting I've ever seen, Mr. O'Reilly! No slant at all! :D

[Rael]

Man, that's the most fair and balanced piece of reporting I've ever seen, Mr. O'Reilly! No slant at all! :D

FUCK IT! We'll do it LIVE!

[Xenophage]

FUCK IT! We'll do it LIVE!

Hahahahahahaha

[The_Orlonater]

How the bloody hell do you calculate? :D

http://mises.org/econcalc.asp

[Freedom 4 all]

Those are his real answers. here is the link to the thread I posted.

http://www.revleft.com/vb/questions-leftists-socialist-t101416/index.html

I haven't been this surprised something wasn't a joke since www.governmentisgood.com. Communists are hillarious so long as they aren't in power.

[David A. Gay, Sr.]

Communists are hillarious so long as they aren't in power.

find a place where they aren't (both?)

[Rael]

Someone suggested the following revision for my paper:


Interview With The Dumbass

February 11, 2009

For my contrast paper, I decided to interview a dumbass. I am at least a halfway sapient human being, so I consider a dumbass to be my ideological opposite(technically, the ideological opposite to a halfway sapient human being is a total effing tool. A total effing tool can be a dumbass, idiot, moron, or other mental abnormality, but this obviously creates too broad a pool to choose from). I use the term dumbass and shit-for-brains interchangeably here. Yes, there is a difference, but not a big enough difference for me to quibble over for the purposes of this paper.
I don't personally know any dumbasses (or at least, no one that would admit to being one), so I had to interview anyone I could find. I joined a dumbass internet forum and posted my questions, and chose what I felt was the most relevant reply. So I can't say that I have a perception of this individual simpleton, but I can explain my perception of the dumbass in general.
Most advocates of any ideology can be broken down into two camps. On the one hand, we have the person who advocates his ideology for utilitarian reasons; that is to say, he thinks that his system will work better than others. On the other hand, we have the person who advocates their system from a natural law perspective, or because he thinks his system is morally just.
Dumbasses are overwhelmingly of the latter type. They advocate their system because they feel that it is fair. Most don't actually look beyond what they think will be the results of the policies they advocate. They only look at, and think about, the initial outcome. For example, when it comes to the minimum wage, the dumbass only thinks about the person making minimum wage who gets a pay increase. It doesn't think about unintended consequences of the minimum wage increase, such as higher unemployment among inexperienced workers (particularly teenagers), whose economic value as workers may be less than the minimum wage. There tend to be very few real utilitarian dumbasses, because it cannot be demonstrated that the system they advocate actually achieves the outcomes they expect, at least, not in a manner that stands up to intellectual scrutiny.
Therefore, dumbasses tend to be emotional people who are prone to knee jerk reactions. They may be well meaning, but because they tend to think with their hearts and not their heads, they invariably come to erroneous conclusions.
After conferring with some libertarian friends, I posed the following questions, and received replies from one person.

[AutoDas]

haha one of the replies you got was someone talking about driving a Ferrari or Lamborghini whenever you want.

[phill4paul]

someone suggested the following revision for my paper:


Interview with the dumbass

february 11, 2009

for my contrast paper, i decided to interview a dumbass. I am at least a halfway sapient human being, so i consider a dumbass to be my ideological opposite(technically, the ideological opposite to a halfway sapient human being is a total effing tool. A total effing tool can be a dumbass, idiot, moron, or other mental abnormality, but this obviously creates too broad a pool to choose from). I use the term dumbass and shit-for-brains interchangeably here. Yes, there is a difference, but not a big enough difference for me to quibble over for the purposes of this paper.
I don't personally know any dumbasses (or at least, no one that would admit to being one), so i had to interview anyone i could find. I joined a dumbass internet forum and posted my questions, and chose what i felt was the most relevant reply. So i can't say that i have a perception of this individual simpleton, but i can explain my perception of the dumbass in general.
Most advocates of any ideology can be broken down into two camps. On the one hand, we have the person who advocates his ideology for utilitarian reasons; that is to say, he thinks that his system will work better than others. On the other hand, we have the person who advocates their system from a natural law perspective, or because he thinks his system is morally just.
Dumbasses are overwhelmingly of the latter type. They advocate their system because they feel that it is fair. Most don't actually look beyond what they think will be the results of the policies they advocate. They only look at, and think about, the initial outcome. For example, when it comes to the minimum wage, the dumbass only thinks about the person making minimum wage who gets a pay increase. It doesn't think about unintended consequences of the minimum wage increase, such as higher unemployment among inexperienced workers (particularly teenagers), whose economic value as workers may be less than the minimum wage. There tend to be very few real utilitarian dumbasses, because it cannot be demonstrated that the system they advocate actually achieves the outcomes they expect, at least, not in a manner that stands up to intellectual scrutiny.
Therefore, dumbasses tend to be emotional people who are prone to knee jerk reactions. They may be well meaning, but because they tend to think with their hearts and not their heads, they invariably come to erroneous conclusions.
After conferring with some libertarian friends, i posed the following questions, and received replies from one person.


roflmao:d:d:d:d

[Rael]

I have decided to reformat the report into lol cat speak and turn it in that way.

INTERVIEW WIF TEH SOCIALIST


FEBRUARY 11, 2009





4 MAH CONTRAST PAPR, I DECIDD 2 INTERVIEW SOCIALIST. IM LIBERTARIAN, SO I CONSIDR SOCIALIST 2 BE MAH IDEOLOGICAL OPPOSIET(TECHNICALLY, TEH IDEOLOGICAL OPPOSIET 2 LIBERTARIAN IZ STATIST. STATIST CAN BE SOCIALIST, FASCIST, MODERATE, OR OTHR IDEOLOGIEZ, BUT DIS OBVIOUSLY CREATEZ 2 BROAD POOL 2 CHOOSE FRUM). I USE TEH TURM SOCIALIST AN COMMUNIST INTERCHANGEABLY HER. YEZ, THAR IZ DIFFERENCE, BUT NOT HOOJ ENOUGH DIFFERENCE 4 ME 2 QUIBBLE OVAR 4 DA PURPOSEZ OV DIS PAPR.
I DOAN PERSONALLY KNOE ANY SOCIALISTS (OR AT LEAST, NO WAN DAT WUD ADMIT 2 BEAN WAN), SO I HAD 2 INTERVIEW ANYONE I CUD FIND. I JOIND SOCIALIST INTERNET FORUM AN POSTD MAH QUESHUNS, AN CHOSE WUT I FELT WUZ TEH MOST RELEVANT REPLY. SO I CANT SAY DAT I HAS PERCEPSHUN OV DIS INDIVIDUAL PERSON, BUT I CAN EXPLAIN MAH PERCEPSHUN OV TEH SOCIALIST IN GENERAL.
MOST ADVOCATEZ OV ANY IDEOLOGY CAN BE BROKD DOWN INTO 2 CAMPS. ON TEH WAN HAND, WE HAS TEH PERSON HOO ADVOCATEZ HIS IDEOLOGY 4 UTILITARIAN REASONS; DAT IZ 2 SAY, HE THINKZ DAT HIS SISTEM WILL WERK BETTR THAN OTHERS. ON TEH OTHR HAND, WE HAS TEH PERSON HOO ADVOCATEZ THEIR SISTEM FRUM NACHURAL LAW PERSPECTIV, OR CUZ HE THINKZ HIS SISTEM IZ MORALLY JUS.
SOCIALISTS R OVERWHELMINGLY OV TEH LATTR TYPE. THEY ADVOCATE THEIR SISTEM CUZ THEY FEELZ DAT IT FAIR. MOST DOAN AKSHULLY LOOK BEYOND WUT THEY FINKZ WILL BE TEH RESULTS OV TEH POLICIEZ THEY ADVOCATE. THEY ONLY LOOK AT, AN FINKZ BOUT, TEH INITIAL OUTCOME. 4 EXAMPLE, WHEN IT COMEZ 2 TEH MINIMUM WAGE, TEH SOCIALIST ONLY THINKZ BOUT TEH PERSON MAKIN MINIMUM WAGE HOO GETS PAI INCREASE. SHE DOESNT FINKZ BOUT UNINTENDD CONSEQUENCEZ OV TEH MINIMUM WAGE INCREASE, SUCH AS HIGHR UNEMPLOYMENT AMONG INEXPERIENCD WERKERS (PARTICULARLY TEENAGERS), HOOS ECONOMIC VALUE AS WERKR CUD BE LES THAN TEH MINIMUM WAGE. THAR TEND 2 BE VRY FEW REAL UTILITARIAN SOCIALISTS, CUZ IT CANT BE DEMONSTRATD DAT TEH SISTEM THEY ADVOCATE AKSHULLY ACHIEVEZ TEH OUTCOMEZ THEY EXPECT, AT LEAST, NOT IN MANNR DAT STANDZ UP 2 INTELLECTUAL SCRUTINY.
THEREFORE, SOCIALISTS TEND 2 BE EMOSHUNAL PEEPS HOO R PRONE 2 KNEE JERK REACSHUNS. THEY CUD BE WELL MEANIN, BUT CUZ THEY TEND 2 FINKZ WIF THEIR HEARTS AN NOT THEIR HEADZ, THEY INVARIABLY COME 2 ERRONEOUS CONCLUSHUNS.
AFTR CONFERRIN WIF SUM LIBERTARIAN FRENZ, I POSD TEH FOLLOWIN QUESHUNS, AN RECEIVD REPLIEZ FRUM WAN PERSON.

QUESHUNS AN ANZWERS

I INCLUDE MAH REFLECSHUNS ON SUM OV TEH ANZWERS IN BOLD. ALL ANZWERS R GIVEN VERBATIM, EGSAKTLY AS TEH PERSON WROTE THEM, WIF NO CORRECSHUN 4 THEIR GRAMMAR,SPELLIN, OR PUNCTUASHUN.

Q1. WUT IZ TEH STRONGEST POINT 2 DEFEND UR BELIEFS?
A2: THEYRE CORRECT
NOTICE THAR IZ NO ATTEMPT 2 USE LOGIC AT ALL. JUS, “THEYRE CORRECT.”

Q2. WUT IZ TEH MOST DIFFICULT QUESHUN 2 ANZWR DAT U COMMONLY RECEIV REGARDIN UR ECONOMIC VIEWS?
A2. Y DO U LIEK RAPE?
I DOAN UNDERSTAND DIS ANZWR, BUT WHATEVR.

Q3. IZ UR WAI OV THINKIN TEH BEST METHOD 4 SAVIN R ECONOMY, AN Y?
A3. SOCIALISM SEEZ TEH INHERENT FLAWS IN R ECONOMY, AN THEREFORE WISHEZ 2 REPLACE IT. WIF SOCIALIST ECONOMY.
NO ATTEMPT 2 EXPLAIN Y IT TEH BEST, OV COURSE.

Q4. DEFINE WEALTH IN TERMS OV TEH INDIVIDUAL, AN IN TERMS OV NASHUN.
A4. WEALTH ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS IZ MEASURD IN RELASHUN 2 TEH ECONOMY IN WHICH IT IN. MAN MAKIN $30K IN EL SALVADOR WILL BE WEALTHY, WHEREAS IN DA US DAT IZ HARD LIFE. AS FAR AS NASHUNS GO, EVRYTHIN FRUM CANADA ON UP.

Q5. WUT IZ TEH BIGGEST OBSTACLE 2 TEH REALIZASHUN OV SOCIALISM IN AMERICA?
A5. PROFOUND LACK OV CRITICAL THINKIN.
DIS AR TEH SO IRONIC IZ ALMOST HILARIOUS. LACK OV CRITICAL THINKIN IZ EGSAKTLY WUT DIS PERSON IZ DEMONSTRATIN.

Q6. WUT IZ TEH GREATEST EXAMPLE OV SOCIALISM WERKIN IN DA WURLD?
A6. I CANT SAY
AHA! DIS PERSON CANT EVEN PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE 2 SHOW WER HIS IDEOLOGY HAS WERKD!

Q7. WUT IZ TEH GREATEST EXAMPLE OV ITZ FAILURE?
A7. GERMANY, FOLLOWIN TEH FAILURE OV TEH SOCIALISTS 2 HOLD ON 2 POWR FOLLOWIN WWI.

Q8. HOW IMPORTANT IZ ECONOMIC POLICY, COMPARD 2 OTHR GUBMENT POLICIEZ SUCH AS CIVIL RIGHTS, FOREIGN POLICY, DOMESTIC POLICY, ETC?
A8. ECONOMIC POLICY DICTATEZ ALL OTHR POLICIEZ IN EVRY COUNTRY.

Q9.WER DO RIGHTS COME FRUM?
A9. TEH POWR 2 PREVENT OTHERS FRUM INFRINGIN ON THEM.

Q10.WUT DO U BLEEV TEH PURPOSE OV GUBMENT IZ?
A10. 2 PRESERVE TEH STATUS OV TEH RULIN CLAS. WHICH IZ Y IT SHUD BE ABOLISHD.
SUM MARXISTS AKSHULLY CLAIM DAT THEIR GOAL IZ TEH ABOLISHMENT OV GUBMENT, AN DIS WILL COME BOUT EVENTUALLY AFTR MARXIST GUBMENT IZ ESTABLISHD.

Q11.WHEN AN Y U COME 2 TEH CONCLUSHUN DAT U WUD BE SOCIALIST?
A11. WHEN I GOT MAH FURST PAYCHECK.
EXAMPLE OV KNEE JERK REACSHUN. NO ATTEMPT 2 BE RASHUNAL, HE MADE DECISHUN 2 SUPPORT AN IDEOLOGY BASD ON TEH FACT DAT HE FELT HE WUZ NOT BEAN PAID ENOUGH.

Q12 .UNDR COMMUNISM OR SOCIALISM WUT IZ TEH INSENTIV 4 PEEPS 2 WERK?
A12. SO DAT WERK CAN BE ABOLISHD.
MUAHAHAHA! I AKSHULLY LAUGHD ALOUD WHEN I READ DIS.

Q13.DO U FINKZ COMPETITIV BUSINES IN AMERICA HAS LED 2 TEH EVOLUSHUN OV PRODUCTS AN AN INCREASD STANDARD OV LIVIN?
A13. COMPARD 2 TEH NUMBR OV TECHNOLOGIEZ TEH GOVT HAS DEVELOPD, NOT RLY.
BALONEY. GRANTD, SUM TECHNOLOGIEZ HAS COME BOUT FRUM GUBMENT PROGRAMS, PARTICULARLY AS SIDE EFFECT OV TEH SPACE PROGRAM. HOWEVR MOST OV THEES TECHNOLOGIEZ AN OTHERS DAT R CREATD FRUM GUBMENT PROGRAMS R AKSHULLY DEVELOPD BY PRIVATE COMPANIEZ DAT TEH GUBMENT OUTSOURCEZ WERK 2. AN THEES INSTANCEZ CAN IN NOWAI COMPARE 2 TEH TECHNOLOGIEZ PRIVATE INDUSTRY HAS DEVELOPD. MARKIT DEMAND DRIVEZ INNOVASHUN, AN GOVERNMENTS DO NOT RESPOND 2 MARKIT DEMAND. THOMAS EDISON, A. GRAHAM BELL, BENJAMIN FRANKLIN, HENRY FORD, AN LOTZ DA OTHERS R EXAMPLEZ OV INDIVIDUALS FRUM TEH PRIVATE SECTOR HOO CREATD NEW TECHNOLOGIEZ.

Q14. DO U BLEEV IN NACHURAL LAW OR ORDR?
A14. YEZ, DEPENDIN ON US TALKIN BOUT TEH SAME TING.

Q15 IF HEALTH CARE IZ RITE, WOULDNT DAT MEEN U HAS RITE 2 DOCTA? IF SO, WOULDNT DAT TECHNICALLY MAK TEH DOCTA SLAVE VIA COMPULSHUN?
A15. IF U LIV IN DA US U ALREADY HAS RITE 2 DOCTA IF U HAS LEGIT MEDICAL ISSUE WHICH NEEDZ 2 BE ADDRESD (THOUGH IT NOT SATISFACTORY SISTEM, OV COURSE).
HE DUCKZ TEH QUESHUN BOUT WHETHR TEH DOCTA IZ SLAVE.

Q16. WUT IZ UR VIEW ON PRIVATE PROPERTY?
A16. I HAS NO PROBLEM WIF PRIVATE PROPERTY IN LOTZ DA SENSEZ.

Q17. DO U OWN UR BODY? IZ UR PROPERTY?
A17. ACCORDIN 2 R GUBMENT, NO IZ NOT. OTHERWIZE I WOULDNT BE THROWN IN PRISON 4 PUTTIN SUBSTANCEZ THEY DOAN LIEK INTO IT.

Q18. DO U BLEEV IN DA USE OV VIOLENCE 2 ACHIEVE UR OBJECTIVEZ?
A18. ONLY IF I R NOT ALLOWD 2 ACHIEVE THEM PEACEFULLY.
DIS AR TEH TEH MOST IMPORTANT ANZWR OV ALL 20 QUESHUNS. IT DEMONSTRATEZ DAT SOCIALISTS R WILLIN 2 KILL U IN ORDR 2 MAK THINGS MOAR “FAIR”. SO FAR, COMMUNISM HAS KILLD BOUT 100 MILLION PEEPS.
MOST LIBERTARIANZ WUD PROBABLY GIV TEH SAME ANZWR DIS PERSON DID. HOWEVR, THAR IZ HUGE DIFFERENCE. TEH LIBERTARIAN BELIEVEZ VIOLENCE SHUD ONLY BE USD DEFENSIVELY, DAT IZ 2 SAY, IF SOMEONE THREATEND THEIR LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY. CUZ LIBERTARIANISM DOEZ NOT ASK OTHERS 2 TAEK ANY ACSHUN, MERELY 2 REFRAIN FRUM USIN VIOLENCE OR COERCION 2 THREATEN THEIR LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY, VIOLENT RESPONSE FRUM LIBERTARIAN 2 ACHIEVE HIS OBJECTIV CAN ONLY BE DEFENSIV IN NACHUR. SINCE SOCIALISM RELIEZ ON REDISTRIBUSHUN OV WEALTH, TEH SOCIALIST IZ THEREFORE WILLIN 2 USE VIOLENCE UPON U, IF U REFUSE 2 GIV UP UR MONEY OR PROPERTY. DIS AR TEH EGSAKTLY TEH SAME BEHAVIOR AS AN ARMD ROBBR.

Q19. TEH MAIN PROPONENT OV MARXISM IZ TEH LABOR THEORY OV VALUE. 4 INSTANCE, I SPEND TEH SAME AMOUNT OV TIEM AN LABOR, PAINTIN PICCHUR. IN DA SAME ROOM, WIF TEH SAME EQUIPMENT AN UTENSILS, TIEM AN LABOR - SO IZ PICASO. ACCORDIN 2 MARX, R PAINTINGS R WORTH TEH SAME. THEY HAS TEH SAME VALUE. DO U AGREE WIF DIS?
A19. NO, TEH VALUE OV EACH PAINTIN IZ DETERMIND BY TEH VIEWR (AN URE DISTORTIN TEH LTV INTO SOMETHIN IT NOT. TEH LTV BELIEVEZ LABOR SHUD BE COMPENSATD FAIRLY 4 DA FINISHD PRODUCT. IF URE FINISHD PRODUCT GARNERS $5 DEN DAT IZ TEH VALUE OV UR LABOR. PICASOS IZ WORTH INFINITELY MOAR, 2 BE SURE).
DIS AR TEH ABSOLUTELY WRONG. HE IZ DESCRIBIN TEH SUBJECTIV THEORY OV VALUE, WHICH IZ CORNERSTONE OV LIBERTARIAN ECONOMICS, NOT TEH LABOR THEORY OV VALUE.

Q20. WUT DO U FINKZ R NEGATIV ASPECTS OV SOCIALISM/COMMUNISM?
A20. IZ NOT HER.
DIS SHOWS TEH TUNNEL VISHUN OV TEH SOCIALIST. HE IZ UNABLE 2 ACKNOWLEDGE ANY FAULTS IN HIS SISTEM WHATSOEVR. EVEN LIBERTARIANISM HAS NEGATIV ASPECTS. DIS AR TEH AN EXAMPLE OV LACK OV CRITICAL THINKIN.

[Gosmokesome]

Do you support using violence againts people except in self-defense?

[Bryan]

Sorry I missed this, but you only need six questions. :)

1) Do you support a federal income tax?

2) If so what is your justification- do you have any moral or ethical claim to take the fruits of ones labor for someone elses use?

3) If someone wishes to not give up the fruits of their labor do you support sending in federal agents to seize what is desired?

4) If said people wish to defend the fruits of their labor is the use of deadly force against them acceptable?

5) Do you support the use of deadly force in such cases?

6) If so, would you consider being one to physically engage in the act of such deadly force?

[Danke]

Sorry I missed this, but you only need six questions. :)

1) Do you support a federal income tax?

2) If so what is your justification- do you have any moral or ethical claim to take the fruits of ones labor for someone elses use?

3) If someone wishes to not give up the fruits of their labor do you support sending in federal agents to seize what is desired?

4) If said people wish to defend the fruits of their labor is the use of deadly force against them acceptable?

5) Do you support the use of deadly force in such cases?

6) If so, would you consider being one to physically engage in the act of such deadly force?

The Federal income tax is not what you think it is. But from an enforcement angle, it is.

[T34]

1.What would be the Goals of the next 5 year plan ?

2.How We Can Increase production of Steel and Other type "A" goods ,in greater quantity per person ?

3.How to more eficiantly comunicate Ideas and programs of the party to the masses?

4. How to make logic the law . and lesser the use of instinct ?