The schooling most of us are forced to attend seem to disdain communsim, at least in rhetoric. If the ten planks of communsim were reformed into questions, would that go anywhere in showing people their beliefs have communist leanings? And would that turn some against these teachings or enforce it?
Plank 2: A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.
As a question: Do you think the rich should be taxed at a much higher level?
Plank 10: Free education of all children in public schools. Abolition of child factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.
Turned into a question(s): Do you think education should be provided by the government? Do you think it should be illegal for children to work?
1) Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
Should the central government abolish private ownership of land and just administer it as it sees fit?
2) A heavy progressive or graduated income tax
Should the government be let free to decide what constitues "rich" (remember the Manifesto didn't mention who should be heavily taxed) and tax all persons earning more than this as heavily as it likes?
3) Abolition of all rights of inheritance
Should the government confiscate all the property of the recently deceased? Remember this applies to all income brackets.
4) Confiscation of the property of emigrants and rebels
Should the government confiscate all the property of those who decide to either resist it or leave the hallowed motherland out of their own accord?
5) Centralization of credit in the hands of the state
Should the government decide who should get credit, how much interest to pay on loans and what is credit being used for? Rhethorical question as this is already in place.
6) Centralization of the means of communications and transport in the hands of the state
Should the government decide where you go, how you get there, who do you talk to and what you can talk about?
7) Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state
Should the government take over more factories, mines, farms etc by force to do with them what it sees fit?
8) Equal obligation to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture
Should the government decide which job is most suited to you and pay as much as it wants?
9) Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of distinction between town and country
Should the government administer a dairy farm as it administers a firearms factory? Should the government decide how people in town and country live and take steps to eliminate the differences?
10) Free education of all children in public schools. Abolition of child factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production
Should the government lure people to send their children to them to be indoctrinated with the promise of "free" "education"? Should the government and not the child himself decide which age start working? Should the government decide to provide education to train obedient workers instead of competent workers? Implied: should government back this all up with the threat of violence?
Personally allow me to say a good chunk of the West's population embraces a good part of the Ten Planks wholeheartedly. The reason? Something for nothing (From each according to his means, to each according to his needs), not to mention the devastating idea of "fairness" or "social justice" Hayek warned us about. Nothing we say or do can convince them to abandon their views: in fact expect the West to march more rapidly down the path. This is made worse by the fact people have come to expect living in what is more or less a "cradle to grave" socialist society but with goods and services only the free market can provide. In short they want "fair" taxation, public schooling, free healthcare and heavy regulations for those pesky capitalists BUT nice cars, high tech gadgets and cheap vacations to exotic places. The incredible wealth creation provided by capitalism in the last century has allowed them to have the best of both worlds but party's over now. China, by buying tons of bonds and selling tons of cheap goods, has helped delaying the inevitable. Now the Chinese demand higher wages (because dirt cheap manpower is growing scarcer and workers have become better educated and more productive) and sooner or later they'll grow tired of putting up with our profligacy. In the meantime let's try and make some money out of these idiots.
Just to clarify...
Translation: a violent criminal organization calling itself "the government" seizes all land
Translation: this violent criminal organization steals a large proportion of all incomes outright every year
Translation: the violent criminal organization steals all large accumulations of wealth
Translation: the violent criminal organization confiscates the property of anyone who opposes it, most likely after murdering them
Translation: the violent criminal organization imposes a coercive monopoly on money creation so as to appropriate resources by inflation
Translation: the violent criminal organization siezes all means of communication and transportion so as to prevent the spread of dissenting information and prevent anyone from escaping
Translation: the violent criminal organization siezes all means of production
Translation: the violent criminal organization enslaves a large portion of the population and forces them to labor on its behalf
Translation: the violent criminal organization forcibly moves slaves around the plantation as required
Translation: the violent criminal organization ensures that slaves receive indoctrination early in childhood and then continual refreshers during working life
...we could boil all this down to just one point, expressed as a question: "Boy, do I have a deal for you, how would you like it if me and my friends stole everything you have and then killed you, can we count you in, comrade?"
I find it helpful to reduce socialist doctrine to this, its essence. The millions of pages spilt trying to make sense of it or paint it in other than these lights amount to a pathetic rationalization of gibberish. Likewise, millions of pages could perhaps be spent trying to turn this into a coherent philosophy, but the fact of the matter is that Charlie is just fucking crazy and likes to murder people.
Dude, you should submit that to the Voluntaryist Reader. I think you could open some eyes out there.
I didn' think about hitting so heavily. My intent was to show that if somebody answered the softball type question in the affirmative, to point out that those who say they aren't communist actually support it in some way. Do you believe a softer approach can have any influence when afterward it is shown those are the ten planks of cummunism? Or should I never give any leeway in this type of duscussion?
I didn' think about hitting so heavily. My intent was to show that if somebody answered the softball type question in the affirmative, to point out that those who say they aren't communist actually support it in some way. Do you believe a softer approach can have any influence when afterward it is shown those are the ten planks of cummunism?
Both approaches have value, sure. Yours is a rhetorical trap, designed to trick people into agreeing with something then exposing what they've agreed to. That can be a useful way to make people check their premises.
Minarchist's list is confrontational and in your face. Not good for your purpose but awesome still.