Could you convince 1 person in 40?

[Inquisitive Lurker]

I give you 40 adults (15-64). Male and Female, all races, just random selection. All sorts of political, philosophical, and religious backgrounds.

You are given several hours with each of these people, one at a time, over the course of several days. Let's say 1 hour a day, 16 people per day total, 5 days a week, for 5 weeks. That's 10 hours per person.

How good are you at putting forth an argument? How good are you at convincing others? You can have any propaganda you want with you, books, charts, computers.

Do you think that you could convince 1 person out of the group of 40 that the time has come for revolution? Convince them that it is worth fighting, killing, and dying for?

That's what it would take, 1 adult in 40.

EDIT: This is all with in the context of the United States.

[Dunk]

I think there are many people who agree without knowing it. A sort of communist without the consciousness.

Are these willing volunteers or unwilling voluntolds?

I knew some contracted interrogators that claimed that with enough time and the right kinds of pressure, anyone can be turned.

Do I personally think I could convince someone that private property must be abolished? I don't know. I know that the things I say and believe do have an impact on those closest to me. My girlfriend, family, best friends. A good friend of mine loves to get me to talk about capitalism and socialism when we get enough drinks in us - he generally agrees with everything I have to say, but always ends with "I don't know, man."

[Bronco]

I think I could convert 1 in 40 to an Anarchist, dont think I'd convince them to sacrifice their life to a revolution nor would I try to for that matter.

Among the 40 there's bound to be some who are politically apathetic or disillusioned with electoral politics and Capitalism, wouldnt be too hard to convince them from there.

[ColonelCossack]

It depends on the contents of the random selection. If they're all mega right wingers, it would be more difficult than if they're already a bit softly liberal.

[ZeroNowhere]

No, I couldn't be bothered to do so. I'd probably use it as an excuse for an extended sleep.

[Revolutionair]

The thing is, I am sure I could convince them that our form of democracy is not people rule and I could convince them that capitalism should be overthrown, however, I could only do so on the ideological level. Dieing for a revolution requires something more. It requires a certain faith in uncontrolled workers.

[Property Is Robbery]

I consider myself to be pretty convincing in arguments. At lest convincing enough for 1 person. I've already convinced some of my family and friends.

[Kamos]

I haven't convinced anyone yet, but I think I could. I'm pretty good at spotting BS and contradictions in people's beliefs and that can go a long way.

[ColonelCossack]

I haven't convinced anyone yet, but I think I could. I'm pretty good at spotting BS and contradictions in people's beliefs and that can go a long way.

the trouble with that tactic is, if you're not careful the person can feel stupid, be put off and walk away. it's important not too sound like a 'smart-ass', for want of a better word.

[The Man]

In my opinion, a large group of people on this planet are actually Communists, they are just unaware of it. I guarantee that a lot of people would support a Classless, Stateless society. They just think Communism means 'Redistribution of Wealth' or 'Tyrannical Governments'.

[Ocean Seal]

Here's the thing: Capitalism cannot exist forever. Material conditions do a fair bit of convincing for us. I'm not saying that convincing people is a bad thing, but that it is something that becomes easier every day due to the oncoming crises of capitalism. In the end it won't be arguments which bring about the revolution (because believe me convincing someone to die for anything cannot be the work of arguments alone), but it will be the material conditions surrounding the arguments. People need something that they can relate to. People will be more open to the idea of moving away from capitalism if capitalism is dying.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

One who is not ready to die is not ready to fight.

[Leftie]

In my opinion, a large group of people on this planet are actually Communists, they are just unaware of it. I guarantee that a lot of people would support a Classless, Stateless society. They just think Communism means 'Redistribution of Wealth' or 'Tyrannical Governments'.

Supporting a classless, stateless society does not necessarily make one a communist. They are many other ideologies which want a classless, stateless society very different to the one we want.

Take anarcho-primitivists for an example :rolleyes:

[Zanthorus]

This thread is emabrassing. We don't need people to die for our fucking cause, the comunist revolution will not have any glorious martyrs it will be the expresion of the needs of the working class which cannot be contained within capitalist society. The crisis of capitalism is at once a crisis of capitalist self-valorisation and working-class self-valorisation. This is what voluntarism ignores.

[Niccolò Rossi]

thisij thierad is emabrassing we don' te need peopel to die for our fuckuing cause the comunist reoiuvlution will not have any glroiutous martrtys it will bt the depxresion of the needs of the workinglc class which cannot be continaed within capitlsiat society the cristis of capitalismi s at oence a crisis of capitalist sef'r- vaorlisation and wroking-class self0-calriosation/ this is what votlunartism ignrores.

This is awesome

Nic.

[Broletariat]

thisij thierad is emabrassing we don' te need peopel to die for our fuckuing cause the comunist reoiuvlution will not have any glroiutous martrtys it will bt the depxresion of the needs of the workinglc class which cannot be continaed within capitlsiat society the cristis of capitalismi s at oence a crisis of capitalist sef'r- vaorlisation and wroking-class self0-calriosation/ this is what votlunartism ignrores.


I understood all but the bold, someone translate

[Leo]

thisij thierad is emabrassing we don' te need peopel to die for our fuckuing cause the comunist reoiuvlution will not have any glroiutous martrtys it will bt the depxresion of the needs of the workinglc class which cannot be continaed within capitlsiat society the cristis of capitalismi s at oence a crisis of capitalist sef'r- vaorlisation and wroking-class self0-calriosation/ this is what votlunartism ignrores.

This thread just got owned by the drunk communist left.

[bezdomni]

Do you think that you could convince 1 person out of the group of 40 that the time has come for revolution? Convince them that it is worth fighting, killing, and dying for?


No, because that isn't true.

I wouldn't try to convince somebody to kill/die for a revolution when there is no revolutionary movement.

This question is (no offense) pretty stupid.

[Aloysius]

I've never gotten past the Stalin/Lenin/Pol Pot argument.

Most of my friends just don't give a damn, and the ones that do are violently right-wing.
It's usually their parents' fault, from what I've seen.

[MarxSchmarx]

I could convince someone on an intellectual level, but in the past my experience has been that they grudgingly concede my points either to shut me up or whatever. But in my experience it's next to impossible to convince most people on a deep, emotional level to relate to the goals of socialism - perhaps the most common reception is the "it didn't work in practice" which is a mighty heavy hurdle to overcome absent an active praxis.

[Manic Impressive]

I try not to make it an argument I find out what pisses them of and try to relate to their problems. Then I give them an explanation to their problems and a solution, the explanation is almost always capitalism the solution is always revolution. The trouble I have is getting them to take it further and actually start reading, most won't even bother to read the manifesto. Not surprising seeing as most haven't read a book since they left school, all part of the diseducation of the working class.

[hatzel]

"The most difficult subjects can be explained to the most slow- witted man if he has not formed any idea of them already; but the simplest thing cannot be made clear to the most intelligent man if he is firmly persuaded that he knows already, without a shadow of doubt, what is laid before him."

Quoting a bit of Tolstoy :)

Still yeah this thread's premise is stupid, for all the reasons that have already been mentioned and more...

[Reznov]

You could easily convince many of these people, but getting inspired to take up the struggle actively?

I doubt it, in context with the United States especially. They would probably just vote democrat instead of republican.

[Die Rote Fahne]

You could convince more than one if you reveal that what you are talking about is communism AFTER you tell them about it.

[Thirsty Crow]

thisij thierad is emabrassing we don' te need peopel to die for our fuckuing cause the comunist reoiuvlution will not have any glroiutous martrtys it will bt the depxresion of the needs of the workinglc class which cannot be continaed within capitlsiat society the cristis of capitalismi s at oence a crisis of capitalist sef'r- vaorlisation and wroking-class self0-calriosation/ this is what votlunartism ignrores.
Had a pint of ale too much? :D

(at first, I thought that someone hacked your account, based on another thread, but by the time I got to the "self-valorisation" bit, I knew better :D)

On topic: I don't think that convincing people, in all sorts of social situations, is very important. But for that matter, I tend to talk about these "things" (I leave out capital's self-valorisation:p) especially when I drink a little more than I should. Sruprisingly, I found out that I can strike a chord with some people.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

thisij thierad is emabrassing we don' te need peopel to die for our fuckuing cause the comunist reoiuvlution will not have any glroiutous martrtys it will bt the depxresion of the needs of the workinglc class which cannot be continaed within capitlsiat society the cristis of capitalismi s at oence a crisis of capitalist sef'r- vaorlisation and wroking-class self0-calriosation/ this is what votlunartism ignrores.

I'm sorry, I've been sober too long, I can only get about half of this post.

Could you repost once the hangover wears off?

[Zanthorus]

The left side of my head still twinges but I think you'll find my original post fairly coherent now.


I understood all but the bold, someone translate

It's 'working-class self-valorisation', it's a term taken from Negri's work which means the process by which the working-class fulfills it's own needs and values, understood as in opposition to the self-valorisation of capital which is the process by which value expands and adds a surplus to itself.

[Hebrew Hammer]

Well, I convinced my roommate (registered and voting Democrat) that Socialism was the way to go and to say "fuck capitalism," so, 1 in 40 should be easy, especially when I get better at theory.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

Well, I convinced my roommate (registered and voting Democrat) that Socialism was the way to go and to say "fuck capitalism," so, 1 in 40 should be easy, especially when I get better at theory.

I really hope your screen name is a tribute to the movie of the same name. :)

[tbasherizer]

I tend to convince 1 part of 40 of 40 people out of 40.

[bezdomni]

I tend to convince 1 part of 40 of 40 people out of 40.

What is this I don't even...


ou could convince more than one if you reveal that what you are talking about is communism AFTER you tell them about it.

I seem to recall reading something about how communists disdain to conceal their views and aims...but it probably wasn't very important. Maybe it was in a dream even...

While the word communism is somewhat sensitive, we should be up-front about our ideas and methods. There is a fine line between speaking persuasively and being dishonest.

[Arilou Lalee'lay]

While the word communism is somewhat sensitive, we should be up-front about our ideas and methods. There is a fine line between speaking persuasively and being dishonest.It would be more dishonest to call yourself a communist/Marxist than not to, unless you're a Stalinist type. Because they're going to think Stalinist types. You have to use their language. Re-brand it, call yourself a proponent of "economic democracy", which has already been used multiple times, but the people you're talking to won't know about it. Or, much better, don't label yourself at all.

Same goes for "proletariat" instead of "working class" and "bourgeoisie" instead of "owners". Unless you're talking to a French person.

[Zav]

Perhaps I could. I've tried many times, and succeeded in a few instances. My way of putting forth an argument seems to be off-putting. When over-simplified, it basically goes like this:

Me: "Capitalism is bad because *insert any of hundreds of reasons*. Communism is good because *antitheses of aforementioned reasons*.

Other Person: "Well, Communism is bad because *insert Capie Cold War propaganda*"

M: "That is incorrect because *insert corresponding facts to counter propaganda*. That is just old propaganda used to convince you that Capitalism is the best socio-economic system."

{O: *repeat with different propaganda*

M: *repeat with arguments against newly stated propaganda*}

*repeat bracketed five or six more times*

M: "*insert barrage of anti-Capitalist facts in an angry and condescending tone*"

*Conversation ends with one angry Commie and one angry Capie who will be much less receptive to new ideas afterward*

So, I have only been successful when dealing with people left of Liberal who already understand Socialism to some degree. I need to figure out how to remain more calm, because it is quite difficult to shatter a person's world-view and rebuild it to be radically different (bad pun, not ashamed).

[Arilou Lalee'lay]

@Zav, don't be so ambitious. Everyone's world view is way too well protected by all that cognitive dissonance stuff to be shattered in one conversation. Just find one issue where their armor of lies has a scratch and work at it. The school system, consumerism, religion, even music, anything that contributes to their world view.

There are some people, the aforementioned communists who don't know they're communists, who can be convinced in a conversation. Finding those people is worthwhile.

[Zav]

@Zav, don't be so ambitious. Everyone's world view is way too well protected by all that cognitive dissonance stuff to be shattered in one conversation. Just find one issue where their armor of lies has a scratch and work at it. The school system, consumerism, religion, even music, anything that contributes to their world view.

There are some people, the aforementioned communists who don't know they're communists, who can be convinced in a conversation. Finding those people is worthwhile.
Well, when I've been successful, those conversations were VERY long (as in months), and that method is how I did it. I like to start with the daily grind. Everyone hates it, and I think it is the weakest link in that armor, followed by consumerism. I've convinced three people this way. One was a Commie and didn't know it, one a Dem. Soc., and one a Democrat.

[Arilou Lalee'lay]

That's the best way to do it, agitate the workers.

I can convince about one in ten people that Marx and I are right on Omegle, 4chan, etc. Unfortunately I have to resort to dirty tricks. Teenagers are seriously messed up from the school system. If you can put yourself in a position of authority they'll take what you say as dogma.

With people in real life I have too small of a sample size. I've tried to convince about ten people, and got most of them to admit I was right without caring or seeing the implications it has for their lives. Maybe webizens are the same way, I hope not.

[Hebrew Hammer]

I really hope your screen name is a tribute to the movie of the same name. :)

It is, here is some of my antifa work:

oHyuf47UvZQ

SSMF. Back on topic.

[Pawn Power]

The real question is what will those forty people teach you?

[ZeroNowhere]

The real question is what will those forty people teach you?Misanthropy.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

This thread is embarrassing. We don't need people to die for our fucking cause, the Communist revolution will not have any glorious martyrs it will be the expression of the needs of the working class which cannot be contained within capitalist society. The crisis of capitalism is at once a crisis of capitalist self-valorisation and working-class self-valorisation. This is what voluntarism ignores.

The revolution is not going to happen in one sweeping action. It will have stages.

Take the Russian revolution. It happened in two phases, admittedly close together.

China's revolution also went through two phases, not counting the Great Leap Forward or the Cultural Revolution.

The battle against global capitalism is going to have to fought in many revolution, some going only halfway, to be completed later. Intermediate steps. One need not wait for the collapse of Capitalism, which I might remind you is theoretical, nor should one wait. When the circumstances are right, when a crisis arises, one should take advantage of it. And to do so, one must be prepared in advance.

And then of course there is the subject of creating the crises, but that's another story. DIY.


America has a task: to create a second or a third Vietnam, or the second and third Vietnam of the world.

[Decolonize The Left]

You don't convince people of "the revolution," or "communism." You raise class consciousness.

- August

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

In my opinion, a large group of people on this planet are actually Communists, they are just unaware of it. I guarantee that a lot of people would support a Classless, Stateless society. They just think Communism means 'Redistribution of Wealth' or 'Tyrannical Governments'.

Sorry, I must pick you up on this.

I really hate this kind of bullshit, nose-up kind of viewpoint.

If the majority of people in this world were communists, we would know about it.

To hold such a view as yours is to view the majority of the people of the world from up above, as though you and I, as active ideologues, are somehow more enlightened people, which isn't true.

It's really funny that you can go around saying that you have absolute faith in the working class, yet at the same time be really quite insulting about the intellectual abilities of ordinary people with a statement such as quoted.

As i've already said, if there were a large group of communists out there, we'd know about it by know. So stop being so condescending, and start realising that, aside from material and political conditions not having been favourable to us for much of the past 20 years, it is our own political organisation and leadership that has been failing the working class, in many places.

[pastradamus]

I dont want to have to convince anybody of anything. I want people to make their own minds up themselves. If they have an interest in socialism it is at that point that I would assist them. People should always have a free choice.

[VirgJans12]

Convincing the time for the revolution has come would probably be only one. But convincing someone of communism would be like 3 - 5. Given they are not as hard-headed as the average American (I'm talking Europe here).

[Heathen Communist]

I definitely could, and have.
I have convinced at least 7, out of less than 30 students at my school (all older than 16) to embrace Socialist thought. Calm explanation, logic, reason, and non-aggressive refutation of antisocialist arguments can prove tremendously effective.

[Public Domain]

Out of 40 with that much time to talk?

At least 5, but with so much time maybe even 30.

Many people are in situations that make them ideal for communist pickings. You just have to keep destroying every single argument, and giving them the hope that not only can their situation actually be improved, but so could that of everybodies.

Some people just don't give up though. If the argument has gone on for a long time, I'm usually shut down with a "well I'm experienced in the ways of the world because of my age, thus my ideology trumps yours."

I'm glad I can shut down the 'Soviet Union and China' argument, the human nature argument, and the motivation argument. But again, some people are steel ignorant walls.

[Rafiq]

This thread just got owned by the drunk communist left.

No, I believe he was putting a Slevoj Zizek accent on him.

[Inquisitive Lurker]

I definitely could, and have.
I have convinced at least 7, out of less than 30 students at my school (all older than 16) to embrace Socialist thought. Calm explanation, logic, reason, and non-aggressive refutation of anti-socialist arguments can prove tremendously effective.

I want to refocus the thread to the original question. This is not just about convincing someone of a particular political view point, this is convincing someone that they time has come to take action, take up arms, fight, and quite possibly die.

[hatzel]

Turns out I'm ever so slightly more convincing than I thought. Just noticed somebody's posted up one of my discourses online. Share the love, people! :cool:

[Inquisitive Lurker]

At the height of theological prowess, which has passed, I used to joke that I could turn an Atheist in to a Priest and a Priest into an Atheist, given time. Thing was, it was no joke. Sadly my skills in that arena are not what they used to be.

[tbasherizer]

What is this I don't even...


I meant that I convince a small part of every person I meet. I think it's better to partially convince a large number of people than to fully convince a small number of people of your world view. With the former, your ideas can be fed back to you with a twist, and you can, in a kind of twisted way, dialectify your arguments against themselves in the context of someone else's experience. It's really helped me to get my friends to believe in the building blocks of Marxism (historical materialism, the class-based conception of history) and see where they take those ideas. It's good for myself to debate with them, as they can show me where I stray from materialism inadvertently, etc. It's kind of like a self-criticism session as envisaged by Mao.

With the latter, where you fully convince a small group, you just generate a cult, in the way Laroche did. I'll also venture to say that any political group predicated on complete conversion is similarly doomed to ideological stagnation.

So to make the convoluted simple, I don't strive to fully convince anyone, as partially convincing people is better.

[Heathen Communist]

I want to refocus the thread to the original question. This is not just about convincing someone of a particular political view point, this is convincing someone that they time has come to take action, take up arms, fight, and quite possibly die.

In that case, the answer is still yes. I can be quite persuasive (at least in person) and I am good at drawing attention to social issues that require prompt solutions.

[Tablo]

I definitely think I could convince 1 out of 40 adults to go far left. Maybe not to the point of killing and dying for the struggle, but I could certainly make 1 out of 40 go revolutionary leftist in their leanings. I have found, however, it is much easier to convince a person to deconvert than support a certain political cause. People are much more skeptical of political stuff than even anti-religious stuff.

[hatzel]

I want to refocus the thread to the original question. This is not just about convincing someone of a particular political view point, this is convincing someone that they time has come to take action, take up arms, fight, and quite possibly die.

I thought we agreed very quickly that the time hasn't come to "take action, take up arms, fight, and quite possibly die," which may explain why we weren't answering that question. And, when it is time, nobody's going to have to convince anybody to get off their butts...

[Inquisitive Lurker]

I thought we agreed very quickly that the time hasn't come to "take action, take up arms, fight, and quite possibly die," which may explain why we weren't answering that question. And, when it is time, nobody's going to have to convince anybody to get off their butts...

No, that never was agreed to. And about half were answering that question, and half got off on political conversion.

When the time comes, IF it comes, for it is no certainty, only theory, don't expect the masses to rise as one and act in any coordinated fashion.

IF the time comes naturally, it will be chaos. Hence the need to organize in advance. And perhaps bring the time about.

[Pawn Power]

Misanthropy.

I don't understand super cynical organizers/activists.

Like, I understand a lot of folks are racist, sexist, conservative, ignorant, etc. but I don't understand how one can have mainly contempt and disdain for people and also organize them to fight for power and recognize the things you can learn from other working people in their daily struggles.