Sci-fi writer Devon Eriksen is one of the wisest people on the planet. He just published a devasting reply to NYU professor Yann LeCun. Devon demonstrates how Marxists use deceptive tactics during debates.
His insight cuts straight to the heart of their rhetorical strategies: asking questions not to seek answers, but to trap their opponent into accepting faulty premises. It’s a subtle yet powerful tactic that often goes unnoticed, especially when the question appears reasonable at first glance. But as Eriksen shows, the trick lies in the hidden assumptions beneath the surface.
In debates, communists do not engage in good faith. Instead, they craft their questions to frame capitalism as inherently flawed, aiming to undermine your principles without you even realizing it. By responding to their loaded questions, you inadvertently validate their worldview, allowing their false premises to guide the conversation. Devon’s analysis goes beyond merely identifying this strategy—he dissects it, exposing the underlying mechanics that fuel these debates and advising how to recognize and avoid falling into their traps.
When dealing with those who push for Marxist ideals, it is crucial to remain vigilant. Don’t let their hypotheticals and leading questions box you into their ideological framework. As Eriksen suggests, standing firm in your principles and rejecting the false premises of the opposition is the first step to winning these ideological battles.
He closes his X essay off with the truth that global elitists are using immigration as a bio-weapon. This is something I have realized over the last few years. Modern wars will not be fought with conventional troops, instead, they will be fought using people as both disease carriers (COVID) and as turd world breeders to displace the core population.
Lastly, he has a convincing prescription to solve the illegal immigration problem in the U.S.A. using the RICO Act which is used to prosecute organized crime. Trump and Vance should follow this playbook as soon as they win the White House.
Devon Eriksen reminds me of another gifted sci-fi writer: Michael Chrichton. I see great things ahead for Devon. I hope that Trump hires him as an advisor when he wins in November 2024.
–Wolfshead
When a communist asks you a question, his goal is almost never to get your answer. His goal is to get you to accept, without noticing, the false premise that the question is based on.
For example, he will ask, “What would you do, under capitalism, to solve the problem of wealth inequality?” He doesn’t care about your answer. He’s not even going to listen. His real goal is to get you to submit to his false premise: the idea that “wealth inequality” is a problem.
It is, of course, not a problem at all, but an indicator of a healthy economy. Wealth equality, on the other hand, is a symptom of universal poverty.
The communist knows your initial impulse will be to answer hypotheticals honestly, because he knows you are a capitalist and have principles. You must never forget that he, being a communist, does not have principles, only the One Law of Marxism:
“Thou shalt not be better than me in any way.”
You must never treat him as if he is speaking in good faith.
Yann is a crypto-communist. He doesn’t care how you answer any of his questions, he just wants you to answer them, because if you do, you have accepted his bullshit premises.
Those are his real goals. All the questions are just an innocuous coating to hide the poison pill.
The dregs of the third world are not coming to our shores because of “events abroad.”
The third world is in no worse condition than it ever was… in fact, capitalism has made things better for them than ever. They are coming here because certain groups of people want them here, and have not only opened the city gates, but also made travel arrangements.
We are not obliged to issue a single tourist visa, temporary worker visa, or any other type of visa.
That is entirely up to us. And if we do choose to issue them, then overstaying them is a crime, which we can establish any sort of legal penalty to which we choose, up to and including death by stoning.
We have no moral obligation to take in a single asylum seeker, or even to review their cases.
The fact that some infiltrator with no allegiance to America managed to get into office and sign a treaty against American interests does not trump American sovereignty. Some other nations might send us a strongly worded letter, the way they do with China when it drives tanks over its own citizens. So what?
Borders are not difficult or expensive to defend. They are cheap and easy to defend.
Nations have been defending borders for thousands of years. Sometimes they did it with nothing but bronze-age technology.
You just build a wall, and defend it with patrolling troops. Walls are not expensive, and they work great unless you don’t defend them. That’s why people have been building walls since the moment we figured out how to build anything at all.
So, this is the communist algorithm again:
- Make up a bunch of bullshit that isn’t so
- Ask you a hypothetical question based on the bullshit.
- Hope you won’t notice the bullshit because you’re focused on the question.
So how would I defend the border in the real world, instead of Yann LeCun’s bullshit disingenuous communist fantasy?
Simple.
People, in organizations in this country, are importing illegals. Those are organizations organized for the purpose of conspiring to commit criminal acts.
In other words, organized crime organizations.
Which means that every member can be prosecuted under RICO, because one of the predicate offenses which triggers RICO is:
Bringing in, aiding or assisting aliens in illegally entering the country (if the action was for financial gain).
If those organizations received money from someone, anyone, else to do this, that’s financial gain. If any of the employees of these organizations drew a salary, that’s financial gain.
Ergo, they are mobsters, and they can be prosecuted like mobsters. Throw some in prison for fifteen or twenty years, confiscate their assets, and the others will flee the country.
Then arrest and prosecute anyone employing illegals, the way we used to.
Then arrest and prosecute any government official providing them with taxpayer funded services. Then start rounding the illegals themselves up, precisely the way we used to.
It’s not difficult.
It’s not expensive. These are third world barbarians with nothing but the clothes on their backs. They are uneducated, poor, unorganized, and stupid.
The only reason they are any threat at all is that they have powerful people in this nation who want them here, and paying to make that happen, and using the power of the government to prevent the people who belong here from resisting.
This is not a humanitarian crisis. It is the deliberate use of third world populations as a bioweapon. The weapons are easy to deal with once the wielders have been taken out.
I absolutely agree and emphasize some rationales following his insights:
Socialists use language as a weapon for the cause, they are not open to discourse.
They would be destroyed if their ideology gets debated.
The twisting of questions and answers is their favorite way, not only since Alinsky. “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules” is an absolute favorite, they demand more than saint like moral perfection from others, which is impossible. They revel gleefully in such mudslinging.
No wonder that many power-hungry politicians embrace these tactics. What is shocking me is how devoid of any basic moral this is. This ideology is the perfect vehicle for evil to thrive.