Debating a Brain-Dead Commie is Like Teaching a Rat How to Fetch

He's too brain-dead to grasp the nature of his own ideology.

He’s too brain-dead to grasp the nature of his own ideology.

They say never argue with stupid people for they will drag you down to their stinking level.

That’s basically true, but sometimes we need to scientifically understand how idiots think, because that is the key to understanding why they continue to grow and infect others. The final realization actually brings you to George Carlin’s viral advice: “Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.”

How do stupid people think and why they they think like do do– this is the main topic of this blog article.

When I say stupid, brain-dead people I am talking of the commies or communists. Can anyone or anything be stupider than the brain-dead commies or leftists?

This reminds me of a Facebooker who once told me it’s “fallacious” to call them “brain-dead” because that presupposes they have brains. Commies don’t have brains, he said. Well, I was just being generous. Should we start calling commies the “un-dead”. The Facebooker said, “hell yeah!”

But for this blog I’ll stick to the term “brain-dead”. Commies are brain-dead because they cannot think in terms of concepts and essentials; they’re like perceptual beings. Humans are supposed to be conceptual animals who have conscience and consciousness. That is, they should be able to process percepts (e.g., things they perceive) into concepts through the process of concept-formation.

Let me give you one perfect, ideal example of a brain-dead commie.

Allow me to introduce this communist Facebook user (so ironic!) named Carlos Pedroso Paterno. I am not sure whether that’s his real name, but Mr. Paterno, according to his Facebook information, is a die-hard supporter of communist politician and NPA (National People’s Army) sympathizer Teddy Casino. Now that explains a lot why he’s a brain-dead commie. His Facebook info also states he lives in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. That’s not really surprising since many Filipino communists who denounce capitalism and foreign investment are hypocrites.

What did Mr. Carlos Pedroso Paterno say that makes him a brain-dead communist?

Well, he simply made the following stupid, hilarious assertions:

  • that NPA is not a communist organization because it is a “mass organization”;
  • that NPA is not a communist organization because it wasn’t declared to be a communist organization by the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP);
  • Which means, for an NPA to be considered a communist organization, there has to be an official CPP directive designating, anointing it as such.

Let’s set aside for a moment whether Mr. Carlos Pedroso Paterno‘s claims are consistent with or follow Karl Marx’s theories. Here I will just present his hilarious claims and statements and show how a brain-dead commie argues or debates.

First,  Carlos Pedroso Paterno challenged me to define communism. Here’s what he said:

commie1At first I thought I had to define the term “communism” according to the theory of Karl Marx. I never thought he had this very weird, anti-concept, brain-dead understanding of the term. So told him the following:

How can we start an argument if you can’t even establish your own basic argument.

1. Tell me why you think I don’t understand “communism”. 
2. Cite my previous statements to prove your claim. 
3. Present your own counter-argument.

The problem is he’s too brain-dead and too dishonest to adhere to the basic rules of a simple debate. His main strategy is not to argue but to simply expose his own dogmatic idiocy.

Every first year college debater is supposed to know the basic rules of a debate, which are as follows:

  • Present an argument
  • Refute or contradict the argument
  • Present a counter-argument

Also, every first year law student knows that a debater cannot compel his opponent to prove something which he did not claim or allege. The burden of proof is on the one making a claim or allegation. However, it seems that this Carlos Pedroso Paterno is too brain-dead to grasp these basic debate rules. He merely proves he’s a typical blind follower of Mr. Teddy Casino.

I said: “By the way, you said CPP-NPA is not “communist”. Well, JoMa disagrees with your hilarious claim. CPP-NPA simply means COMMUNIST Party of the Philippones- National People’s Army.”

Carlos Pedroso Paterno: “Naginbento ka naman ng salita…Wala ako sinabi ang CPP ay hindi communist…Ang sinabi ko ang NPA ay hindi communist organization…Don`t put your wors sa bibig ko.”

At this point it was becoming clear to me this commie has a very different, weird, absurd interpretation of the term “communist”.

I simply said: “Your understanding of basic concepts is so infantile and hilarious. Everybody knows NPA is the armed wing of the CPP NDF, which is a communist organization. You’re defining things according to your infantile understanding.”

Carlos Pedroso Paterno“tsk tsk tsk , magbigay ka nga ng link mas mainam yum galing mismo sa CPP na sinasabi ang NPA ay communist organization.”

My reply: “They must be a capitalist organization then…”

Carlos Pedroso Paterno: “Hindi lahat ng member ng NPA ay communist…Maari in the process ay maging komunista sila, but NPA itself as an organization is not communist.”

The best question to his claim is: Says who?

My reply: “Obviously you’re defining terms according to your own simplistic understanding. To you ‘TERMS’ are reality, not what people actually hold as their belief or advocacy.  What is the NPA then? Are you telling me you have the authority and power to define people as communists or non-communists?”

Since it was impossible to argue with someone who had long renounced the use of logic and reason, I proceeded to define my terms.

I stated the following:

Communism is defined as the most advanced and resolute section of the working-class struggle.

According to Marx, the communists may be differentiated from other groups by the following indicators– they act as leaders of the entire proletarian class and groups; and they represent the advocacy and interests of the entire proletarian movement as a whole.

Now, why is the NPA a communist organization? It’s because of the following–

1. It is the armed wing of the COMMUNIST PARTY OF THE PHILIPPINES.
2. It adheres to the political advocacy of the CPP being its ideological and intellectual base. 
3. It advances the principles of Marxism or communism.

Here’s a snapshot of the conversation:

commie2

Based on his style and behavior, it’s pretty much obvious his goal is not to debate but to commie-troll and expose his own brain-deadness. But the show must go on to further dissect the content of his brain cells, if any.

Carlos Pedroso Paterno then asked me to present a link or CPP directive showing the NPA is a communist organization. Here let me state that I find it even ridiculous to debate whether NPA, the armed-wing of the communist party, is a communist organization. But according to Carlos Pedroso Paterno, NPA is not a communist organization because there is no particular CPP directive declaring it as a “communist” organization. See how this brain-dead commie thinks? Again, we’re not yet arguing whether his own interpretation is consistent with the Marxist theory.

So, what I did is that I posted a CPP directive titled Relationship of the Party with the NPA and the United Front”This directive states (emphasis mine):

It is wrong to speak of the separateness and independence of the NPA as if the Party leadership were something dispensable. The Party and the NPA have distinct organizations and functions but they are inseparable and interdependent, with the Party playing the principal role and the NPA the secondary role in this relationship.

The entire Party is at the head of the entire NPA. At every level, from the national level downward, the Party committee provides the political leadership to the command of the NPA.

commie4

It is crystal clear from the CPP directive that the party and NPA are “inseparable and interdependent”. Yet  Carlos Pedroso Paterno, who knows nothing about the political structure of the CPP-NPA and his own ideology, still dogmatically insists NPA is not a communist organization due to the absence of a particular directive declaring it to be so. See how his thought process works? That’s why he’s a brain-dead commie.

Carlos Pedroso Paterno, however, conceded CPP and NPA are united but that doesn’t prove the latter is a communist organization.

Question: According to who?

He cannot answer. His standard response is as follows:

commie5

That’s the exact moment Carlos Pedroso Paterno lost his residual commie-sanity and went haywire.

But then he finally gained the courage to explain his own understanding of communism and why the NPA is not a communist organization.

Here’s what he said…

Carlos Pedroso Paterno“Ang NPA ay hindi isang organo ng partido at isang hiwalay na organisasyon.. Dahil ang NPA ay MASS ORGANIZATION, dahil mass organizaton ito , Kahit sino basta nasa wasto idad ,at malakas na pangangatawan at handa isakripisyo ang buhay higit sa lahat tanggap ang armado pakikibaka ay puwede sumapi sa NPA.”

commie6

My reply:

commie7

Since Carlos Pedroso Paterno is the one claiming “NPA is not a communist organization”, basic debate rules dictate that he has the burden of proof. He has the obligation to prove, by showing CPP directives, that NPA is not a communist organization. What I am arguing is that both CPP and NPA are a communist movement because, according to their directive, they are “inseparable and interdependent” and that they are motivated by a single ideology and a common goal.

I simply said:

So according to you, all communists in the world who are not members of the CPP are not communists… What a moron.

Let’s apply syllogism to your arguments…

Carlos Pedroso Paterno: “Only communists may join CPP. NPA members are not communists. Therefore they cannot join CPP.”

THEREFORE, all self-claimed communists on earth are not to be called “COMMUNISTS” if they’re not part of the CPP.

LOL! Hilarious idiocy of a commie moron named @Carlos Pedroso Paterno.

commie8

Here’s Carlos Pedroso Paterno‘s usual brain-dead, hilarious reply.

commie9 The only possible reply: LMAO! As in…

[You may view the entire debate here.]

I simply said:

The utter stupidity of that statement is showing… So, you’re saying that only CPP members can be communists. That’s what you’re saying. That’s how you understand the term “communist” or “commie”.

All other self-claimed communists who follow Marx’s philosophy but not members of the CPP are not communists. Did Karl Marx say that to be a communist, you need to be a member of the Communist Party of the Philippines? LOL!

Show me at least ONE PROOF where Marx said you need to be a member of the Communist Party of the Philippines to be a “commie” or “communist”. Just one proof or link.

For the round 2 of our interesting debate Carlos Pedroso Paterno totally lost his remaining brain cells. This time there’s nothing left to do but to simply enjoy the moment and have a good time.

Here’s his another brain-dead explanation why NPA is not a communist organization:

commie10

My goal this time is to know whether he actually read and understood Karl Marx’s bible The Communist Manifesto. It appears Carlos Pedroso Paterno has his own stupid theory of communism, which simply proves he’s nothing but a scatter-brain.

I asked him the following question:

Where did Karl Marx say that members of MASS ORGANIZATION are not to be called communists? 

Here Carlos Pedroso Paterno was determined not to answer the question. Instead he unprecedentedly exploded and began typing commie-rants.

commie11

Here’s another proof that Carlos Pedroso Paterno is too brain-dead to understand basic debate rules. Here’s his style:

1. He’d make an insane claim that NPA is not a communist organization because it is a “mass organization”.

2. When asked to prove where in the CPP Directive is it stated that NPA is “mass organization” therefore not a communist org, he would ask you to prove where the CPP stated that NPA is not a mass organization.

A typical brain-dead commie and Teddy Casino blind supporter.

I then explained to him Karl Marx’s definition of communism. According to him, communists “merely express, in general terms, actual relations springing from an existing class struggle, from a historical movement going on under our very eyes.”

commie12

Carlos Pedroso Paterno claims that NPA is not a communist organization because it is a “mass organization” and that there is NO CPP Directive saying NPA is a “communist” organization. Therefore, members of mass organization are not communists and that only CPP can declare through its directives whether a person deserves to be called a “communist”.

Since I knew my mission was almost completed, I simply asked him the following questions:

  1. What is your stupid understanding of “mass organization”? Is CPP not a mass org?
  2. Show us a CPP Directive where it is stated that NPA is a mass organization, therefore, its members are not communists.
  3. Where did Karl Marx say that members of mass organizations are not to be called “communists”? You’re the one making that claim so you have the burden of proof. Know the basic debate rules.
  4. Where did Karl Marx said that only members of the Communist Party of the Philippines deserve to be called “communists”.

No spin, no lies, no stupidity, no diversionary tactic, no BS. Just answer these damn questions.

Then another group member joined the conversation explaining to Carlos Pedroso Paterno things he needed to know.

commie13

 

Between Ramon and Carlos Pedroso Paterno:

commie14

Observe Carlos Pedroso Paterno‘s poor reading comprehension and utter inability to understand simple concepts.

commie15

 

Carlos Pedroso Paterno is a brain-dead commie due to a number of reasons. First, he cannot think in terms of concepts and essentials. Second, he is unable to integrate his elementary understanding of communism with Karl Marx’s theory. This is why he naively thinks– or suggests (call it what you will)– that NPA is not a communist organization because there is no CPP directive declaring it so. Is this what Marx said? No! Third, he cannot think logically and scientifically. His brain is too dead and weak to process a tiny bit of information. He cannot and doesn’t understand that the CPP and NPA is motivated by a single ideology and pushed by a common goal, which is to overthrow the bourgeoisie class and to replace the system with a communal one. Fourth, well, he’s a communist.

Because Carlos Pedroso Paterno is a brain-dead commie, he’s not even aware the logical, direct, resulting conclusion of his arguments is that only the CPP or the Party itself can declare who’s a communist or who’s not. Note that he’s been dogmatically, stupidly asking for a CPP directive to prove that NPA is a communist organization. And that’s the reason why he kept on telling me I don’t understand the term “communism”.

First, communism is an ideology conceptualized by Marx. A communist, simply put, is one who advocates and adheres to the principles and dogma of communism. However, what Carlos Pedroso Paterno is saying is, only the CPP can declare whether a person is to be called “communist” or not. That is, his ridiculous, illogical, fallacious interpretation is purely party-based– that the source of communistic ideal is the party itself, not one’s embrace of the ideology.

The main problem with the communists is that cannot even logically understand their own ideology. This is why commies like Carlos Pedroso Paterno fall prey to communist dogmatism.

  • Another Facebook conversation with a commie and Teddy Casino supporter Carlos Pedroso Paterno who claimed any group can establish its own government.

Here’s another encounter with a brain-dead commie named Andrew Eseng:

Commie-Debate

*FACEBOOK LINK*

Here are some of their evasion tactics. Whenever they can’t answer your question or refute your argument, they would:

1. Resort to linking, which shows their inability to articulate what they know or their arguments.

2. Tell you the issue had been discussed in the past even though they know you were not part of that alleged discussion.

3. Tell you the question had already been answered in a previous discussion (allegedly) without any intention at all to copy-paste the answer or to provide a screenshot of the alleged discussion. Example: LINK.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s