Thanks for the lengthy reply... there were only a few places where I wanted to add something...: Also,in a post-capitalist society can there be an effective form of education that will prevent such things as "witch hunts"?
Some of my education ideas are in dated form at http://www.envirolink.org/greens/california/civic-ed.html
(skipping)
: It can be both.This debating room is proof of that.Then you may not agree. Of course there are people you have debated with who will most
: likely think that your idea of debate is a "diatribe". Especially some of the rightwingers who can't stand your guts.
They probably are resentful because I threw some facts in their faces that contradicted some of their dogmas. If they think my idea of debate is a "diatribe," then they're projecting, the way the Newt Gingrich projects his own faults upon others when he talks about "tax-and-spend liberals" while representing the third-most Federally-subsidized district in the US with the third-biggest campaign war chest in Congress.
:As matter of fact you may have clobbered more rightwingers than I have. I wind up agreeing with you just about all the time when viewing some of the exchanges in this debate room and others. But before you steamroller me into oblivion I must say that nobody stole the American Dream. It was never there. My ancestors told me that and then that's another subject and a little too personal.
My response: I believe that Americans need something to believe in, some sort of dream to get them through the day, like everyone else. That's the American Dream, and attempts to complicate the issue by revealing the true American history of genocide, exploitation, discrimination, and greed will be countered by Americans with a retreat into ignorance. That stuff isn't the point -- dreams are in the heads of dreamers, they serve a purpose there. If you're going to make communism appeal to Americans, then communism will have to be part of the "American Dream."
And rightwing arguments need to be inspected very carefully, and when they're wrong, establish what debaters call "direct clash" -- disagree with one of their declarative sentences, and offer reasons and evidence for your support.
