1
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
By: Raymond Mulholland
2
How many times do we do this and expect a different result?
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
“The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results,”
--widely attributed to Albert Einstein, but may have come from a 1980's 12 step program
3
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Goals
1) Describe the three main means of persuasion
2) Identify the four types of Socialists
3) The nature of the threat Socialists bring
4) Strategies for public and private discussions
5) Logic fallacies to watch out for
6) Tactics favored by Socialists and counters to them
But the ONE THING never to do is...
4
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
AVOID AT ALL COSTS
Quoting the Bible during discussion!
5
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Why avoid bringing the Bible into the discussion? pt 1
1) Church no longer has credibility in our culture
--many clergy refuse to discuss practical, real world matters with congregation
--some clergy refuse to accept the world we live in as being important
--different Christian churches publicly attack other Christian faiths
--many Christians openly defy scripture that contradicts their personal views
--church scandals constantly in the news
2) Few people really care about Christian teachings
--Christians only represent about 65% of US
population
--only 20% of Christians go to church
--this means only 13% of US engages in the
Bible regularly
--person you talk to may have been victim of a
Church scandal or otherwise harmed by a “Christian”
3) Jesus warned against serving two masters (Matthew 6:24)
--are you there to Evangelize, or to stop a poisonous Socialist idea from taking fruition?
4) Actually gives the Socialist an open invitation to deflect away from main issue
6
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Why avoid bringing the Bible into the discussion? pt 2
5) One does not need Christian teachings to be a “good person.”
--“I have not slain men” (Ancient Egyptian, the Confession of the Righteous Soul)
--“In hell I saw ... murderers” (Old Norse, Volospá)
--“Utter not a word by which anyone could be wounded” (Hindu, Janet)
--“Never do to others what you would not like them to do to you” (Analects of Confucius)
--“He who is asked for alms should always give” (Hindu, Janet)
--“Brothers shall fight and be each others' bane.” (Old Norse, Account of the Evil Age
before the World's end, Volospá)
--“Your father is an image of the Lord of Creation, your mother an image of the Earth.
For him who fails to honor them, every work of piety is in vain. This is the first duty.” (Hindu,
Janet)
--“To marry and to beget children” (Greek, List of Duties, Epictetus)
read the appendix to C.S. Lewis book, “The Abolition of Man” for more
7
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Why avoid bringing the Bible into the discussion? pt 3
6) IT IS NOT NECESSARY!!!
--what the Bible calls “good” is not an arbitrary decision
by Jehovah, but rather what will lead us to the best life on Earth
possible
--as we can measure and observe the world Jehovah
created, and as we have assurance from Him that He will
maintain it's inner workings (Genesis 8:22 for example), we
can predict what our behavior will lead to
--knowing what certain behavior will result in, we can make
sound moral decisions on whether it is “good” or “bad”
--while there are limitations to man's knowledge that will
result in any human moral theory to fail, I will soon show why
this is not a concern for dealing with the socialist
“The point which I should first wish to understand is whether the pious or holy is beloved by
the gods because it is holy, or holy because it is beloved of the gods.”
--“Euthyphro”, by Plato
8
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Why avoid bringing the Bible into the discussion? pt 4
7) It is liberating
--One will be on the offensive, not the defensive
--The Socialist will not be able to deflect to obscure Biblical teachings
--The Socialist will not be able to quote other “Christians” and what they believe
--One can love one's brother by listening to one's brother*
--get a better understanding of where he is coming from
--will often discover the real issue is deeper than he originally implied
--One can focus on the topic at hand instead of juggling multiple issues*
*Note that by not quoting the Bible, one can actually obey the Bible better!
9
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Types of Persuasion
10
The True Socialist
--understands Socialism well enough to use it for own goals
--highly intelligent
--able to be consistent with their inconsistency (using logos is difficult)
--can be difficult to debate unless prepared
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Types of Socialists, pt 1
The Useful Idiot
--has nothing to do with “intelligence,” but rather how much harm
they can do without realizing what they are actually doing
--almost always speak of things they have little actual experience
or knowledge in
--if otherwise rational, good chance of showing the error of their
ways (using logos may be successful if done tactfully)
11
The Zealot
--understands a little about what Socialism is
--obedient, intelligent and energetic
--ability to argue is limited (they may start off with logos, but switch to
pathos quickly)
--a glimmer of hope is possible, depending on how deep they are in
their Socialist career
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Types of Socialists, pt 2
The Troll
--Pathos is the only means they have to persuade others
--they have absolutely no ability to reason (logos is
ineffective)
--they act solely to make others miserable, they have
no real interest in what they are advocating for
--they are beyond human salvation, trying to persuade
them is pointless
12
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Nature of the Socialist Beast
Kimberle Crenshaw called Socialism a virus in The Combahe
River Collective Statement
What do we know about viruses?
--needs a host to survive in
--virus constantly needs to find new hosts
--mutates cells of the host in order to reproduce
--if enough cells are mutated, the host dies
--if host can kill enough mutated cells, the host will
eventually remove the virus from the body
13
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Nature of the Socialist Beast
Kimberle Crenshaw called Socialism a virus in The Combahe
River Collective Statement
What do we know about viruses?
--needs a host to survive in
--virus constantly needs to find new hosts
--mutates cells of the host in order to reproduce
--if enough cells are mutated, the host dies
--if host can kill enough mutated cells, the host will
eventually remove the virus from the body
So What?!?
The key to stopping Socialism is to treat it like the virus it is
1) Don't be a carrier of the Socialist virus
2) Isolate those who are “sick” from the “healthy” population
--prevent known Socialists from infiltrating our institutions
--isolate others who are “sick” from the healthy population
3) Once 1 and 2 are accomplished, THEN, and only then, treat the “sick”
4) There is NOTHING “kind” about letting others become “sick”
14
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Using Logos
In a typical, rational debate, each side is trying to persuade the other
that their point of view, called a “position,” is correct
In order to support one's position, each party provides a
logical argument
--the argument is based on facts or points of view
called “premises”
--the argument uses premises and explains how they connect to
support their position
Each party has the opportunity to examine and critique the
others argument
--typically looks for premises that are weak or invalid
--can add additional relevant information that may have been lacking
--looks for problems in how the other connected his original premises,
called “logic fallacies”
Ideally, the process goes back and forth until both parties come to a mutual understanding
This process only works if both parties are acting on “good faith”
15
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Using Logos - Reality Check
Socialists are not logical creatures, they prefer pathos
Socialists rarely, if ever, act on reason
Socialists never act in “good faith”
HOWEVER
Most observers have a natural curiosity for “why,”
so being able to defend one's own position will often
help win others over because you will generate your own ethos
For Socialists who are not irredeemable, one can help them learn how to use logos, and
possibly even convert them
--one is not actually in a debate doing this, one is helping the other to create a sound,
logical argument
16
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
When to Debate?
Like modern war, fighting Socialism will never be settled in a single encounter
--the war is made of many different campaigns
--each campaign is made of many different battles
--each battle is made of many different encounters
Like Christianity, Socialism is looking at eternity
--little things will eventually add up to big things
Choose your battles carefully, you do not have to fight every one
Questions to ask yourself
--what do I know about the Socialist in question?
--what topic is being discussed
--do I need to be prepared or not?
--will I be able to control my emotions?
--is this a public or private encounter?
--if public, how big is the audience?
--will I add something, or just be drowned out by the crowd?
“To know your enemy, you must become your enemy”
--Sun Tzu
17
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Strategies for Pubic Debate
In a public debate, the emphasis needs to be on preventing the virus from spreading. Any
“healing” that may take place must be by accident, not by design
--most people would rather be publicly humiliated than to publicly
admit they were wrong
As Socialism is based on flawed logic, logos is on your side
As most Socialists prefer pathos to persuade, one must seek to turn
that weapon against them
--let them prove to public that they are the unreasonable one
“Wear it like armor and it can never be used against you.”
--Tyrion Lannister, Game of Thrones
Most Socialists are Socialists because of some deep hurt
Seek to find out what the real concern of the Socialist is
--one will come across as caring to public
18
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Strategies for Private Debate
In a private debate, the emphasis needs to be on healing the virus.
--this is where “kindness” has a place
Privacy changes the dynamics quite a bit
--neither side has any pride to protect
--deeper, drawn out discussions can take place without fear
of the virus spreading
--one can terminate a hostile conversation easier as no one has
to be shown the insanity of the other
Much more likely to win over a “mildly sick” or simply misinformed person
19
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Generic Approach to Any Debate
1) Listen to initial commentary by Socialist
2) Decide if you are opposed to the whole idea, or only parts of it
3) Ask clarifying questions on at least one part you don't understand
or don't agree with
4) Determine if response to question(s) has either logic fallacies
or if there is deflection
a) if there is a logic fallacy, address it in the form of a question
b) if there is deflection, address it per the final portion of this lecture
5) Repeat steps 2 through 4 until you feel comfortable you fully understand the others position
6) Lead the Socialist, with questions, to either a solution agreeable to you, or until they
arrive at their inherent cognitive dissonance
If the Socialist becomes overly emotional at any stage, make polite efforts to end the
discussion, but clearly imply that they are the ones shutting down the conversation
20
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Some “Dos” in a Debate
1) Take control of the discussion (with questions)
2) Make them explain their position
--this way, they can't claim you are ignorant
3) Be attentive to what they say
--Socialists are attention getters, they will not only tell you
all you need to know to in order to take them down, but they will
do so gladly
4) Be genuinely curious in what they say
--the more they talk, the more ammunition you will have to use against them
5) Engage with “helpful” comments and questions
--these are designed to make the Socialist think instead of react
--this makes you appear as a friend instead of an enemy
6) Be humble
--actually feel sorry for how misled they are
--don't “rub it in” when they realize they trapped themselves, this way you come
across as caring
21
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Some “Don'ts” in a Debate
1) Don't assume he is 100% wrong
2) Don't assume you know his position better than he does
3) Don't ignore what he says, even if he is wrong
4) Don't let him get away with anything (although one may have to
choose which point to address)
5) Don't gang up on a Socialist
--ganging up gives the Socialist “pity points”
6) Don't become emotional
7) Don't be afraid to hurt feelings, true kindness is giving them a healthy world view to live by
8) Don't loose control of the discussion
--by asking questions and insisting on answers to these questions, you determine how
the conversation progresses
9) Don't waste time on a lost cause, except as necessary to prove to the public he is irrational
22
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Logic Fallacies -- Non-Sequitur
Latin for “it does not follow,” and is a common mistake for even the best philosophers
1) ALL Socialist ideas will have the non-sequitur fallacy embedded in them.
2) True Socialists can be very consistent with their core inconsistency
--it can be buried deep and hard to find
--fortunately, few Socialists are True Socialists
3) The ultimate goal of any discussion with a Socialist is to uncover this inconsistency
Counter-tactic: come up with alternative conclusions and present them as questions
23
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Logic Fallacies -- Either/Or
Variation of the Non-Sequitur Fallacy, also
known as the “false dilemma”
Assumes that one must always choose between two
alternatives
--creates two extreme and mutually exclusive
alternatives, then insists on one or the other
--the preferred alternative is the most appealing
--common with marketing campaigns
It is truly ironic that while Socialists believe that
any two concepts are reconcilable, that they also believe that there must be one and
only one way to accomplish their goals -- their way
Counter-tactic: depends on the situation, typically either ask why there can't be a “both/and”
solution, or come up with a third, non-extreme solution and have the Socialist explain why
it can't work
This counter-tactic will not fix the problem by itself, but it will allow you to steer the
conversation to a more productive line of debate, and one of your choosing
24
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Logic Fallacies -- Slippery Slope
Another variation of the Non-Sequitur Fallacy, and has
similarities with the “either/or” fallacy
Assumes that one trivial move must lead to a series of other
moves that will have a catastrophic outcome
In truth, all Socialists ideas are slippery slopes as they will
never accept anything less than the full realization of their mad
dreams (praxis), so this is another example of their hypocrisy
Counter-tactic: decide for yourself at what point a good idea will
become a bad one. Present it to the Socialist and say you will support any effort to keep
things from getting that bad.
This counter-tactic will force the Socialist to choose between either being seen as irrational,
or to put a specific limit on his praxis. As such, this tactic has the welcome benefit of the
Socialist being put in a very uncomfortable dilemma of his own making
25
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Logic Fallacies -- Petitio Principii
Latin for “assuming the initial point,” also known as a “circular argument” and “begging the
question”
Assumes the conclusion is true in the basic premise
--put another way, the conclusion is used to prove the basic premis
--any attempt to debate it results in the argument going around in circles
--very frustrating to deal with
--generally means Socialist is totally incapable of having any type of discussion
Easy to identify: as one questions the Socialist, the Socialist will quickly answer with
something he had said before
Counter-tactic: go completely through the cycle twice, then call the Socialist out for
a circular argument the third time you hear the same explanation for the third time
When he inevitably denies
using a circular argument,
point out that this is the third
time he said the same thing
26
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Logic Fallacies -- Parricide
Stems from Latin meaning “to kill kin,” refers to the killing of a parent or other close
relative, and it is related to petitio principii
In the parricide fallacy, the conclusion proves the basic premise to be false
This is relatively rare and can be difficult to identify, but if discovered then the Socialist
will be left completely and utterly defeated
--best to leave the Socialist alone at this time: in public he has lost all credibility and
in private it will likely lead to an end of discussion
Counter-tactic: point out how his conclusion contradicts his premise
In some cases, the
Socialist may attempt to
reverse your question back
on you -- this often results
in the Socialist committing
infanticide and even
greater humiliation
27
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Logic Fallacies -- Genesis
Greek meaning “the origin or mode of formation of something,” refers to a source of a logic
premise
The Genesis Fallacy stems from assuming that something must be true because of its
source
--Useful Idiots generally supply the ethos that a Socialist needs to make it work
This is a very common fallacy in Socialist debate, but often goes unchallenged
--one cannot challenge every detail of a debate and appear as a rational person
--it is an easy trap to fall into, as we often have respect for the Useful Idiot ourselves
--remember that Useful Idiots often discuss matters outside their field of expertise
Counter-tactic: when a particularly damaging premise is introduced into a debate, ask for
its origin (if not given) and say you will research it
--this allows you to retain
control of the conversation
while still respecting what the
Socialist had said
28
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Logic Fallacies -- Strawman
This is the creation of an argument opposing what the Socialist really believes, and is
deliberately made as weak as possible (hence the “straw”)
--often incorporates widely believed, but false, information
--this is a preemptive effort meant to allow him to control your discussion
by telling “your” side of the story
--Christians often use this tactic in a very Unchristian manner
while attacking other Christian beliefs
--note that my advice on what to do and not do in an argument
is completely opposite Strawmanning
Almost always works to your benefit
--focuses the discussion to a single point of contention
--is almost always grossly incorrect about your beliefs
--is easily fact checked if time allows
--he is not arguing with you, he is arguing with some unreal person in his head!
Counter-tactic: agree that what they say is indeed horrible, ask where the information
came from, look for it on your cell phone, and then tell them what you discover
Bonus points if you can prepare ahead of time for the strawman!
29
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Logic Fallacies -- Ad Hominem
Latin for “to the person,” it is short for Argumentum ad Hominem, it refers to attacks directed
at the other person rather that the position the other person is holding
--this is an objectionable tactic in a court of law
Ad Hominem is essentially a “going out in a blaze of glory” for the Socialist
--by attacking you instead of your position, they have essentially forfeited the debate
--unable to win by logos (which is no surprise), they attempt to bring you into an
emotional state (pathos), a form of rhetoric they excel in
--it is an all or nothing proposition for the Socialist, either you become emotional and they
win, or you remain calm and they loose.
Counter-tactic: remain calm and in your area of expertise: logos
30
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Socialist Strategies -- Deflection
Socialists, and many other hateful people, simply cannot win
an argument with logos
--Useful Idiots are generally unused to being challenged,
a few may be converted
--Zealots may have one or two points to make before
they break down
--Trolls simply don't care, all they want to do is make
people miserable
--True Socialists, however, can debate a long time before their inconsistency catches
up to them
Deflection is a means of sounding like they have an argument without actually having one
--any effort to avoid responding to something you said is a form of deflection
--the goal is to either wear you out, to get you upset, and/or to escape from an argument
they realize they are going to loose
While all the following strategies are specialized forms of deflection, general attempts
to avoid dealing with the subject at hand are also possible
--taking advantage of the equivocal nature of words
--aimless “requests” for information
Counter-tactic: remain focused on the topic at hand, do not allow him to take control
of the discussion
31
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Socialist Strategies -- Irrelevancy
While most deflection techniques seek to distract one from the main point, Irrelevancy
usually stays on point but brings up premises of little or no value to the position
Can be hard to recognize because information is generally considered “useful”
Counter-tactic: at some point, ask the Socialist how this information is relevant to his
position
--Pay close attention to the response, as it may very well reveal the core inconsistency
in his argument
32
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Socialist Strategies -- Gaslighting
Named after a play where the husband is tormenting his wife by lowering the glow of the
gas lamps in the house, and then calling her crazy when she comments on it
As Socialists always use faulty logic and are always concerned about blaming oppressors,
gaslighting is an inherent part of all their rhetoric
Gaslighting seeks to undermine the self-confidence of the target
--it is a form of manipulation
--it is sometimes unintentional, but can be damaging
nonetheless
--very common in abusive relationships
Counter-tactic: ask a relevant question to regain control
of the argument, and address his responses as appropriate
Don't ever take what the Socialist will say personally,
it's never about you, it is about their delusions
33
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Socialist Strategies -- Death by a Thousand Cuts
One will give a detailed response to the Socialist, and the Socialist
will nit-pick your comments mercilessly
--if one tries to explain a comment, the Socialist will simply
have more material to nit-pick
The goal of the Socialist is to wear one out:
--one will spend lots of energy trying to explain something
--Socialist will spend a few seconds finding fault with it in hopes one will talk even more
Remember: the more one speaks, the more the other has to use against oneself
--keep own comments short and to the point
--have prepared responses handy, ones that are already well thought out and correct
Counter-tactics:
--keep own comments short and to the point
--admit to mistakes one makes
--have prepared responses handy, ones that are already well thought out and correct
34
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Socialist Strategies -- Snuck Premise
A snuck premise is a controversial fact or opinion was assumed to be true when stating a
position
--all Socialist ideas are grounded in flawed logic, they are cleaver in making the flaw of their
logic their snuck premise
Almost everyone does it
--some common ground between people is essential for
any rational discussion
--“Strawman” Arguments are simply loaded with snuck
premises
--variations of the “either/or” fallacy are common by
using snuck premises, usually with an emotional term
Extremely effective
--if one takes the bait, then it can be very hard to win the argument even against a troll!
Can be difficult to detect
--often is seen as “common knowledge”
--one must listen carefully to what the Socialist says
Counter-tactic: identify the snuck premise, and challenge it in an inquisitive way
When one calls a Socialist out on this, be prepared to be gaslighted with an ad hominem attack
35
Socialism: How To Address A Socialist In Public and in Private
Socialist Strategies -- Equivocal Words
All words are equivocal
--we have the ability to create a virtually infinite number of ideas,
but only a few thousand words with which to describe them
--Even Shakespeare was limited by vocabulary
--his works have a word count of 884,000, and used an
estimated 20,000 to 30,000 unique words (1,400 he is credited
with coining)
--while most Americans theoretically have a similar range,
most only have a practical vocabulary of 5,000 to 10,000 words
Poetry v Technical Writing
--in our ever more technical world, we are losing sight that words can have
multiple meanings
--Socialists are very adept at “playing both sides of the coin” when it comes to
the equivocalness of words
--Non-Socialists, especially overly proud “Christians,” are amazingly incompetent in
understanding the equivocalness of words
Counter-tactic: ask the Socialist to fully explain what he means by certain key words
36
Socialism: How It Infiltrated the Church
Questions?