When trying to explain socialism

to people, why do they immediately reject any kind of explaination you give? I had an discussion with two friends last night. To summarize, one said that laborers don't create surplus value but the CEO does and that private property is fair. But what really got to me, and the real reason why I created this thread, was the fact that one of these kulaks told me he had read Marx. I had to explain to him concepts like collectivization and private property, yet he told me with a straight face that he had read Marx and even threw in Gramsci which contradicts his absolute ignorance on the subject in the first place. Just to fully convey the feels of the conversation: he told me the classic "you'll grow out of it."
Fucking hell, this dude thinks wealth redistribution means "socialized housing" (his actual words) and "handouts"

I don't understand why someone would blatantly lie about reading books. Like, if you know little about a subject or is just misinformed why wouldn't you admit that and try to seek the truth instead of lying to maintain your own willful ignorance and bias?

Do you often have conversations about politics with your friends?

If yes, then you should educate them on what different definitions mean and make sure you all agree on these before you move on to discuss broader political topics.

If no, then just agree to disagree and find some normie topic instead of politics.

He may have "read Marx" in the sense that he may have read just the manifesto (or, even more minimally, quotes from Marx out of context). I wouldn't be surprised if he'd heard of Gramsci only from the right-wing "cultural Marxism" memes, though.

Additionally, often times political arguments are actually arguments about ethical stances rather than policy ones. I can't count the number of times I've spent a half hour arguing with someone on discord only to realize that they are basing all their arguments on Kantian deontology or some other shit. In these cases you really have to convince them on an ethical front before you start talking about policy.

How do you convince a social darwinist of socialism? (guessing that social darwinism is an ethic stance)

Maybe try clean yourself up a little first, and for God's sake man try and at least be sober before launching into the 18th Brumaire.

He probably read chapter 1 of the German ideology for university and concluded that he now understands what Marx is about. Or something like that.

By demonstrating that he has a meme-tier understanding of evolutionary theory and that all his positions do not logically derive from it at all.

...

can you name one common fascist/nazi opinion that does not align with social darwinism, for example?

The whole conception of society as a desperate struggle between actors who try to step on each other to get on top where only the ruthless survive is contradictory with many the observations of real evolutionary processes as observed by Kropotkin. It reduces the complexity of Darwinian theory where the 'fittest' survive - which can take many forms, including propensity towards altruism and cooperation - and reduces it to a system where the 'strongest' survive by conquering the weak.

are you friends with academic agent

He just ul'ed a retarded vid mcdonalds strike
I think he should debate someone from the IWW next

On the*

It's an immunological reaction. Ideas are kind of like ideas or parasites, they make you think about them. Bulletproof platitudes are like a means of defense for stupid people who don't know how to handle something they're not prepared for.

because they're scum sucking idealists and base their thoughts and definitions on things they imagine to be true rather than what they can prove to be true.

Some people are like that. It's easy to parrot the opinion of some short online thing you read then back it up with some false thing to give it more credibility.


Drunk politics arguments are the best politics arguments though.

I know I am not smart. One thing I know is that I know nothing at all and all that. But whenever I don't fully understand something I atleast try to learn about it. That's why I got introduced to socialism, because I saw people talking about 500 gorillion dead babies under gommunism and wanted to know more but I got my shit turned upside down once I actually learned about it. Why would people blatantly regurgitate nonsensical shit without at least looking up the definition of the ideology in a dictionary? It's that level of ignorance that truly scares me. Just like how people don't believe in global warming or shit like that. I don't want to call them stupid but how they process information without criticism is an actual learning disability. /rant

It's apathy towards knowledge/education bred by consumerism/the shitty schooling system. The prospect of spending a few hours looking some stuff up, or even (god forbid) reading a book seems awful in comparison to playing some shitty game or shitposting in their preferred ideological trashcan. Instead they see some shitty memes or grainy info-graphics and feel emboldened by this advanced knowledge the sheeple couldn't possibly have access too.

I know this feel all too well.

The iron law of Karl Marx is that everybody who claims to have read Marx hasn't actually read Marx.

That's just depressing. I wouldn't even blame the school system, I mean, I live in Scandinavia and people seem to be just as politically illiterate as in America. In other words identity politics and blatant ignorance of our economic system and the alternatives. I really think the only way to circumvent this issue is to teach politics from elementary school and intensify education in general. However, I also feel that our overconsumption and fixation with entertainment is, as you say, a definitive contributing factor to people being misinformed. I don't want to make it sound like I am made of tinfoil but the guberment's propaganda and disinformation over a century in the red scares are also definitive contributions. I hate that I hate people not understanding theory but it really does effect me in the sense that my worldview cannot be achieved without popular effort, na mean?
Thank you for that FONV pic btw, is that dude NCR in camp mccarran who gives out that jungle vault quest?

...

Truly. They literally apply the "no true scotsman" fallacy incorrectly to an ideology that has a set definition. I don't understand why they think the definitions are subjective or open to radically varying interpretations. I like to bring up the examples of DPRK calling itself democratic when they bring up Nationalsocialism and Hitler or USSR and Stalin or Venezuela and so on. They usually ignore me and sarcastically say "real socialism hasn't been tried pfff huh" in a smug voice which makes me want to smoke PCP and cut my dick off like that rapper.