I just want to hold his weak little body and hug him. ;_;

...

...

...

you experience hell before you die

after is ?

wew

shiggy diggy

The only way we can attack his position is if we translate while taking into account his position and views.
He says that any socialist who doesn't attempt to address the issue socialism tries to solve is a conartist.
We generally agree, in our hatred for armchair socialists. The socialists who do nothing don't deserve to be called socialists, as they really don't measure up to much more than a sack of potatoes in a chair with a pile of bound paper on the table next to them.
But, it's plausible he means people who don't give away all their money to the poor. Here lies the problem: there's no point in doing so if it still means we're a slave to the private property owned by the people owning them.
Yes, we temporarily marginally increased the standard of living of those people, great! But, we're still living under the oppressive thumb of the people who have the wealth, aka money, aka power to do so.
It'd help if he didn't attack a strawman, but actually attacked the liberals.

here

...

Are you telling me to read a book or are you giving me a good argument?