Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Debate With A Socialist

Rate this topic


R Roland

Recommended Posts

Allright i thought it would be interesting to see how an objectivist would respong to a debate i'm having with a friend.

His Response

Other Guy(Socialist):

wow, some heated arguments here.

okay, first of all, barack obama is not a socialist. i just don't see what part of his opinions are "socialist" as you say. you mean high taxes? we need higher taxes if you want to protect this country. it seems like you don't want to pay shit for all the services the government provides for you. no wonder the gov't is in such a deep deficit right now. and second of all, you don't have any reason why socialism is bad. and therefore, your argument is deeply flawed, showing that you are holding unproven prejudices.

and i want to just mention your comment about private sector creating jobs for the general public, but that's just bullshit. throughout history, individuals or groups with money (businesses) abuse those who work for them. its a proven fact. if it weren't for the meager government control over business sector, none of us would have even decent part-time jobs.

and also, let's compare private and public schools. if private schools are so much better, why don't you just go there? the bottom line is, because of government, anybody can at least afford to go to high school. how many people in the world do you think have the privileage to do that? so, stop spreading your elitist ideals. it makes me sick. and in my opinion, public schools are just fine, and will get better with obama's presidency.

now, when i talk about government controlling economy, im not talking about total control over economy like north korea or cuba. i know that doesn't work. so stop assuming that all obama supporters are communists. for pete's sake, is that how you carry out your argument? government control, what we mean, is moderate tax control. and that works. no doubt about that.

and im assuming that you don't believe in taxing rich people either. okay, but what i don't get is logic behind the idea. many thinks that giving tax-breaks to rich will put more money back into the economy, but that's just wrong. rich people are rich no matter how high the taxes are. they will spend their money regardless of tax rates. they are the ones buying expensive cars and nice large houses when many people are losing their homes because of forclosures, can't get proper medical treatment because of high insurance costs, barely getting by day by day with almost nothing they are getting paid after taxes. give tax-break to lower and middle income classes. or, at least raise taxes for the higher income brackets. obama all the way!

My statement

ME:So your saying the government creates jobs through more governmentneh don't think so. The only way the government can create jobs is through pro business pro growth pro capitalism envirement. And your obama is not that envirment. everything out of government controll is not as successful as the PRIVATE SECTOR. look at public schools vs private schools look at the operation of the post market vs ups & fedex look at GOVERNMENT Budgeting vs the budgeting of private industries. I dunoo it might be me. Government controling economy is not effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He begs that question almost his entire argument. To be clear, begging the question (also known as circular reasoning) is a formal logic fallacy when one assumes something is true, just because.

Take for instance, his stance on public schools vs. private schools. Which one is better, he says? Public schools. Why? Because they're public schools.

Also, some of his conclusions can be reduced to an absurdity. He says that rich people will be rich no matter how high taxes get. It is doubtful if anyone could stay rich under a 100% tax rate.

Overall, he is a weak opponent. Point out he begs the question far too much, and that he has not offered you an argument but instead a statement. But really, after that, I would ignore him. Judging from the insults he has woven in his writing, he seems as though he likes to argue from emotion and intimidation.

And for future reference, and I mean no hard feelings, I would suggest you work on your grammar. How you write says a lot about both your intellect and how seriously you take ideas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't waste my time arguing with this person. He appears, from this one post, to not have the mental acuity to seperate partisan political propaganda from fact.

I do need to work on my grammar. I don't know why I can't write better.

Anyone else think i should not ignore this guy?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kind of enjoy debating leftists like your friend here, but it can be exhausting and futile if you are unable to get them to focus. This guy has clearly swallowed every drop of the liberal/left-wing/marxist ideology, so rather than refute every sentence of his rant, you might want to keep the debate confined to the moral argument for capitlaism and individual liberty. If you dont get anywhere with that (and I doubt you will) then move on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why bother arguing in specifics - schools, budget, business? If you must waist your time on this guy, take it down to the core issue - Individualism vs Collectivism.

From what you have written of your conversation, he sounds like the emotional-concrete-bound socialist and would be in deep water defending his core values rationally. Then, when you realize that there is a huge gap between the meaning of his words and his understanding of them, you can retire your frustration into a calm smile of condescendence.

I'd love to hear the continuation of the conversation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wow.

"A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still."

I don't think there is much you can say to change his underlying philosophy. The only "hope" you may have is to pose a "thought experiment" in the vein of Atlas Shrugged.

Have him imagine a world where the producers say "enough" with the taxes, interference, meddling and regulations of the government, and just they "go away". Perhaps to some distant land or island. All that is left is the mighty government and the consumers. What would that world look like?

Remember, every benefit we enjoy in our society, be it air conditioning, cars, cell phones, contact lenses, shoes etc is the product of a business person / entrepreneur / inventor. It is NOT the product of a consumer, the government, the church or wishful thinking.

What is the engine of our society? And what were happen if this engine stops?

If we want this engine to continue, should we penalize this engine (ie, taxes), or should we reward it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have him imagine a world where the producers say "enough" with the taxes, interference, meddling and regulations of the government, and just they "go away". Perhaps to some distant land or island. All that is left is the mighty government and the consumers. What would that world look like?

I expect he'd say new producers would arise after the current ones left. It is a common argument that I have seen many times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you must waist your time on this guy, take it down to the core issue - Individualism vs Collectivism.

I agree. Watch the series of animated shorts here. It will give you a great basis from which to approach him (or better yet, watch these WITH him):

http://youtube.com/user/ST0PandL00K

Edited by KevinDW78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 10 months later...

I just found this board. I'm not an Objectivist but a practicing Roman Catholic, so my perspective is probably different from most people on this board, though we seem to arrive at the same conclusions more often that not, surprisingly.

When dealing with a person like this who's been spoon-fed a mountain of BS, I feel it's best to take him to fundamentals, which you have and he doesn't. A philosophy that espouses totalitarianism-lite can't have a foundation based on anything but emotion without admitting contempt for people as human beings.

Therefore force him to approach the argument from the perspective of the kinds of choices that you'd give any other child. Ask him which is better, for people to be wealthy or for people to be poor? Then ask him if it's better for people to be free or people to be enslaved.

Tell him that it's simple fact that a person who has more responsibility over his own life has more freedom, and that when you take that responsibility away from him, you also take away his freedom. By government taking full responsibility for the lives of its citizens, it must by necessity enslave them.

Explain basic economics to him. A government that cuts taxes in an overtaxed system will get more revenue than the same government raising taxes. This has been proved under both Kennedy and Reagan. When you force him to acknowledge that socialists aren't really out to help people, but instead to make things more 'fair', remind him that 'fairness' was the rallying cry by which both the Nazis and the communists enslaved and brutally murdered millions of people during the last century. They thought that they were doing the right and moral thing in committing the evil acts that they did, in order to make wealth more evenly distributed. They were elitists and socialists at heart and in fact.

Or you could just ignore him, or enroll him in a critical reasoning class and get back to him in a year.

Edit: I apologize for bumping this thread. I just realized how old it was.

Edited by NotCrazyDan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He won't understand your politics without understanding the ethics of egoism. So if you want to argue with him, nevermind the politics for a while and go back to basics. It might help if you see this person positively, as someone who wants to be good but happens to be grossly mistaken about where the solutions for his personal freedom should lie, someone who learned philosophy and politics mostly unexplicitly, instead of yet another socialist idiot. Maybe send him a link to Anthem?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...