Can Mark Pellegrino get Socialists thinking?

Here are some of Mark’s words of wisdom from his recent conversations on Twitter.

Links are to the first tweet in the relevant section of the thread so you can read both sides of the conversation.

What is Socialism?

“Sure I understand the idea of sharing. I do it all the time in life. That’s not what socialism is… it’s centralized control of the means of production… the most vital human act, forcibly removed from the control of the individual and placed in the hands of proxies for the ‘people’. That’s problematic on multiple moral, epistemic, and political levels. And that’s why it fails everywhere it’s consistently tried. Control of production by political entities always ends badly.”


Nonessential ways socialism differed from fascism

“In fact read the paragraph AFTER the highlight to see the NONessential ways socialism differed from fascism. I’ve screen shotted many pages from various articles… shall I own you some more?”

“What’s ‘Democratic’ about socialism? oh yeah. Not much in the end.”

“1) You are a self confessed socialist. Fascism is third way socialism. And yes, Most countries now are corporatist states… and there is no principle in your government that comes close to the American principle of right (which Americans themselves have been divorcing themselves from since the majority of our intellectuals transported German socialism and pedagogy to the the states before the progressive era. So… yup… we’re turning into you.”

“Which [Third Way] maintained the basic tenets of socialism: egalitarianism, individual subordination to the collective, and ACTUAL state control of industry, while allowing for the semblance of prices (as they had to do in the Soviet Union) and the pretence of competition.”

“That’s the non essential. It narrows the ‘common good’ down from the working class to the nation… but a collective is a collective. Try to avoid reality harder.”

“It’s a NONESSENTIAL difference. Do you know the difference between essential and non essential. Socialists carry on about fascists they way Protestants carried in with Catholics… but the differences are in the ritual, and what aspects they focus on. Essentially? Christian.”

“Nope… it repudiates non essentials and holds on to the essentials which are the concentration of power, and the subordination of the individual to the common good, the distain for capitalism, and the control of prices and wages..socialists just don’t like to be identified with fascists cause it messes up their self identification as moral beings.. (which they aren’t)… better to learn it now yeah?”


“Socialism and democracy are also the antithesis of liberalism. Don’t be a cliche…”


“Only people who can’t think too discriminately would say that. My statement acknowledges the relationship between the state, the individual and the means production as identical in essentials between fascism and socialism. Yours ignores the absence of the state in capitalist systems… it pretends what we have now is capitalist… no.. I’m essentials it is fascist.. which is to say corporate socialism. What’s really funny here is how desperate you are to protect socialism and deny your affinity for fascism… but you can’t.”


“Here’s the hair you can’t seem to split. There’s a difference between political power and a market of ideas. In the first instance, where one can force one’s will on another, violent, rights violating ideologies could conceivably be banned. In the realm of ideas where there is competition in an open society… everything can be in play… and competition prevents the ideas from going underground to echo chambers where they metastasize (just like CRT grew in the Petrie dish of universities and then acquired institutional monopoly) and now attempts to displace its competition via acquiring more institutional power, useful idiots (like you) and the imposition of fear…”


“Fascism is third way socialism… like Leninism is an evolution of Marxism. They both (respectively) came out of observations re the failures of socialism (on the one hand) and the proletariat, on the other. But they are what they are. Collectivist societies that subsume the individual to the state… Nazism just focuses the group down to the nation instead of the whole working class. But in all ways save for some nominal private ownership… they are twins.”

“The skeptic socialist always declares a false victory when no such victory has been won. Remember saying it’s so doesn’t make it so? Saying socialism is liberalism doesn’t make it so.”


The Welfare State

“the state has monopolized charity for the last sixty years and incentivized poverty (which was falling steadily every year UNTIL the establishment of the welfare state). And unsupervised by the state doesn’t mean unsupervised. Nor does it mean lawless.”


“the government used the depression to extend its influence through price and wage controls, and make work projects. But that just prolonged the downward cycle. Private watchdog firms would provide information to consumers… since it would be a competitive market reputation would mean everything. If a firm was dishonest, it would lose credibility. Unlike regulators today who can mess up like mad and still survive the bureaucracy. Meanwhile, firms would compete to get the seal of approval from reputable agencies (as they did at one) time for The Good Housekeeping seal of approval…) or as they do today for Michelin Stars… etc.”


Billionaires and wealth

“Life isn’t about mere subsistence is it? It’s about achieving your values. It just so happens, in a free country, you can only achieve your values by creating values. When someone creates values effectively they do very well. They question is: why don’t you need people to do well?”

“[The accumulation of resources] is a value to you too. You don’t need a cell phone. But you have one. Yeah? Freak show. You don’t need a tv or a computer, but I bet you have one. Have a car? Do you really need that? What about more than two pairs of pants or more than 2000 calories a day..? You Freak show u.”

“Only because the left keeps claiming [the wealth gap to billionaires] matters. It’s low hanging fruit because it’s visible and , like a gun, you can point to it and vilify it without having to touch cause and effect or get into hard stuff like thinking.”

“Jesus? How are you suffering at the hands of billionaires? Does tweeting on your billionaire provided communication instrument count as suffering at the hands of billionaires?”

“So passing laws to compel people to act against their own interests, and robbing them are not acts of force. 🤣 got it.”

“You don’t increase the quality of people’s lives by robbing billionaires. You’re just a dumb angry dude pretending to be moral. The American billionaires that come immediately to my mind have done more for me by the values they created than by them cutting me a check… the feeling a normal person would have is gratitude for their creative energy and enterprising spirit. Instead they get sucks like you who know next to nothing about economics and hasn’t graduated above third grade level concrete bound reasoning: he has more… bad.. sophomoric.”

“Nah, they’re spot on. but your understanding of wealth creation could use some work… so long as people have the freedom to move up economically (as about 97% of the population does) ‘inequality’ of wealth is the ‘ inane’ concept here. Cause no one got there by taking a goddamn thing from you or anyone else. In fact, they got there by creating tremendous value for everyone. (Thanks billionaires)

“Maybe the executives have less to say about wages than supply and demand? Wages are a price and as subject to the laws of price as any other good or service.”

“No. It’s not fair. You are obligated to do your level best for YOU and what and whom you value.”


“Right. You’d prefer concentrated power. Your belief that concentrated wealth is the same is simply wrong. Sorry. Not the way the world work. Jeff Bezos’s billions don’t hurt you at all. Arguably, they help you. The same can’t be said for a politicians power.”

“Fair share is a rubber word that means nothing objective. The fact is what two people agree on given their individual conditions is ‘fair’ even if not by your standards. See how your idealism leads to you bossing people around under the phony banner of ‘fairness’? And as far as Bezos and society goes… his company got MILLIONS of people through onerous lockdowns… so much ingratitude and ignorance about what an achievement that is. You take much for granted friend. And FYI… economic ‘democracy’ IS the free market. Where you vote directly for what you want and nothing else by soliciting the business… where you are free to use competitors and bargain. But a political ‘vote’ in the distribution of anything, is just force. Don’t be that guy”

“Again.. that’s not the way it works.. see how right I was? I’ll tell you how monopolies and cartels are a state (not capitalist) phenomenon… but that’s gonna take too long… so I’ll save it for later. I’m going to read and hit the sack. Check your premises.”


“You mean the workers in China who travel a thousand miles to get that job because their alts are far worse? And once they get it they have the opportunity to rise economically? See how you’re just in your own fantasy and other peoples real alts mean nothing to you? See how you’re ready to destroy that for them because it’s not your preference? Ew.”


Income inequality

“Creating a narrative? Ok. It’s a non issue so long as people are making money by creating value in an open market. If they are making money by virtue of gov privileges, or taking advantage of currency manipulation… then it’s a real problem.”

“Of course you get rich by working hard. You also bestow values on others they didn’t have before. That said, You can also get rich by taking advantage of bad monetary policy. But corporations and individuals don’t make monetary policy. Politicians do. Well… bankers do… but they’re all in bed with government and printing money FOR the government; Not for your wellbeing or mine.”

“You forgot ‘in the name of the regulatory state…’ that thing you think is great is what gives politicians inordinate power over other people’s property and incentivizes the very corrupt things you correctly note. Your solution? More of the same. Mine? Separation of state and economics. But you couldn’t even conceive of that so you’ll keep attributing the same erroneous causes to effects and make the same mistakes again and again.”



“It’s a damn accurate opinion given my experience… and his… Of course This is mainly people with advanced degrees in the humanities and he’s written great stuff on the topic… certainly dr. Fouci is a good epidemiologist who knows very little about economics and politics. Einstein is a bad philosopher… but people listen because…..”

“I don’t think I’m disrespecting you… and if you read Thomas Sowell’s work… primarily The Vision of the Anointed… and have issues with his findings.. take them up with him. I would certainly listen to an exchange between the two of you. That said. I love many academics. My own philosophy profs… tons of scientists… you name it and I’m sure I’d dig you if we actually talked. [Thomas Sowell] is a good egg. Outside the box thinker. I’d be interested in hearing your perspectives on his perspectives.”


Doing your own thing — when is it a problem?

The line is Force and provable harm. So, when you think you can force your will on me… or when what I have done causes objective damage to you.


Radical lefties

“🤣 more like radical lefties… you know, intellectual masturbators who create mental maps of their opposition (aka strawmen) and then attack in a circle jerk of fallacies… like… you maybe?”

“Nah… radical lefties jettisoned liberalism for old world statism under the cover of altruist morality. Instead of the old world aristocracy, it’s a political class of ‘intellectual elites’ guiding the rest of our lives by science aka, anything the state does in the name of good”

“Then you haven’t been paying attention. The political elites (who are the spawn of academia). Subsidize everyone BUT the class trying to get ahead on its merits. Remember the child of capitalism? The middle class? That first time in history social mobility was possible? Thanks capitalism. Any good capitalist says ‘no more subsidies’. But the political class likes creating dependency. It comports with their Platonic vision. Keep the rich tethered by fear. The poor by envy… who wins?”

“See this [dependency] comes from a f*cked up notion of ‘dignity’ which stick materialists define as ‘having the basic necessities’ see what ‘having’ stuff does for dignity and then get back to me. Real Dignity is in autonomy which state dependency destroys in both the party it steals from AND the party it redistributes you. Both are robbed of autonomy AND of the respect of choice and the kindness of charity. So… you’re dead wrong. *strict materialists”

“Or it’s the right one. Of course education is to blame. It’s a vicious circle. The self appointed platonic kings create the monsters who occupy the institutions, then, rinse and repeat. Who are the ones propagating the literal INSANITY… the epistemic madness going on today?”

“Because the education establishment is feeding peeps like you that line of deterministic bull and robbing you of your free will… there’s more harm in that than any trust fund baby (a phenomenon you should spend ZERO time focusing on). See how be t you are at people you don’t even know. You hate them and are making them responsible for all the ills in society. Swallow more kool aid. I would urge you to look into the history of American education… what ideas have been dominant… why… what it’s leading to… it is a story of particular ideas.”


Owning the means of production

“Where did you learn your Marxist claptrap? College? I want to know. It ain’t from the world that’s for sure. What’s preventing YOU from owning your own means of production?”

“I know where [‘labor theory of value’] comes from. And it’s a stupidity that Marx capitalized on to justify his nonsensical theories… you know no capitalists talk about the labor theory of value except to refute it. It’s a fundamental tenet of Marxism… and an error in smith and Ricardo.”


Free speech

“What I am promoting is the free flow and exchange of thought via debate. That’s what civil society is. You are promoting closing that down. If this person is ‘bad’ prove it by debating him in the public forum. That’s how you respect the minds of others you know. Making declarations that you intend to enforce by creating narratives and using the relational violence of social media to control others whose opinions you don’t like, is the opposite of civil, the opposite of respect for your fellow human being. I won’t listen to the show, but I will if you engage this person honestly… if he’s what you say he is… then you have done is all a service of putting sound ideas against bad ones.”

“Aren’t YOU preaching hatred and elimination? Not rejection by rational debate, but cancellation of other human beings based on beliefs you claim to define? Let’s say this group is for rebellion against the civil authority… aren’t you too? You call them Nazi’s. You clearly don’t mean it in its literal political meaning, since the rebels at various state capitols this year used brown shirt tactics and bear a very close resemblance to Nazi’s in their basic ideologies… but as an indication of their racial orientation, but aren’t you also race forward? Haven’t YOU claimed superiority (intersectionality is a superiority scale after all) and inferiority of racial identities? How does that not make YOU what you’re claiming others are?”

“See you just did something Nazi’s do… you pretended I’m defending a particular group when I’m actually defending the principle of free speech and OPEN debate. This implies you are NOT for open debate.. would you say that being AGAINST open debate and deliberately mischaracterizing a person’s position to gin up mob hatred is farther away from or very close to Nazi tactics of argument..? I’ll pause for your reply?”

“I wonder if Robespierre looked in the mirror and saw a fascist after he happily guillotined the impure around him? Nah. Self appointed moral puritans never do.”

“People like Hitler and Che do what cubby is doing…. PREVENTING dissent. All ideas should be exposed to debate and scrutiny. That is NOT the same as giving them power over other. Denying access to thought IS the expression of power.”


“And what did the Nazi’s do to dissenters in their rise to power but SUPPRESS them. What is this person suggesting but the same narrowing of what is ‘allowable’ discourse. Any way you cut these cats are cut from the same cloth as every other authoritarian out there.”

“You seem to not get it. YOU are calling for suppression. YOU. Rather than composing your thoughts and countering the opposition You bitch and moan that it shouldn’t have a voice. You demonstrate that the ideas are bad by countering them with better ideas. That’s civilization.”

“More reason to DEBATE them. Follow? Authoritarianism thrives in an atmosphere of fear and suppression… where ideas become verboten, violence follows.”

“But it’s not ‘authoritarian’ to suppress bad ideas? Cause once you cross that line with ‘it’s ok cause it’s bad’ then it’s just a matter of who is in power and defining what’s bad… then it may be you. ALL ideas must be DEBATED… not suppressed.”


“Remember how the Nazi’s in Germany let competing ideas flourish? Remember that? Me neither. Remember how Nazism is widely considered a fringe disgusting ideology by the overwhelming majority of Americans cause there’s competing ideas? Me too.”

“You know why you think this? Because you have competing ideas in the market place of ideas. Crazy how that works right? Bad ideas get less purchase in an open society… weird right? Is that too complicated for YOU to comprehend?”

“Nah.. we believe ideas should be challenged. You think they should be suppressed. That’s precisely what leads to the horrors you think you’re avoiding.”

“EVERY part of [National socialism should be challenged]… why is nationalism bad? Why is socialism bad? Why is national socialism bad. Why is racism evil? In today’s society where where people are sympathetic to each of these ideas individually (from both sides of the political aisle) the complexities need to be completely refuted. They only gain ground in a culture that promotes ignorance… jingoism… and intellectual conformity.”

“You think dissenters could dissent in Nazi Germany? What were the brown shirts but the brigade of thugs who broke up the meetings of political rivals with fists and clubs. Why? Because they were unacceptable. And once they established an atmosphere of fear… no one would rise to challenge them. So long as there is competition of ideas douchebag nazis will always be on the fringe. This mania for suppression is well intended, but we know that good intentions pave roads to certain places…”

“How you have free speech without bad ideas is beyond me… care to tell me how you sort that out? Go.”

“Unfortunately for your authoritarian tendencies… the dignity of humanity rests on autonomy. And the only way one can be autonomous is by being fully informed. That means. Ideas are free. Speech is free. Debate is how you refute bad ideas.”


“I’m promoting @rondeaulivia who is a libertarian African American woman. Do you have a problem with her?”

“What I am promoting is the free flow and exchange of thought via debate. That’s what civil society is. You are promoting closing that down. If this person is ‘bad’ prove it by debating him in the public forum. That’s how you respect the minds of others you know. Making declarations that you intend to enforce by creating narratives and using the relational violence of social media to control others whose opinions you don’t like, is the opposite of civil, the opposite of respect for your fellow human being. I won’t listen to the show, but will if you engage this person honestly… if he’s what you say he is… then you have done is all a service of putting sound ideas against bad ones.”

“See, I supported ZERO violence over the last year. ZERO. How much did you cheer on the storming of state capitols, the bricking of police officers. The burning of federal courts. The establishment of an starless, zone in Seattle? If you said a single act of civil violence was good or just then don’t come at me about some fool on the other side. Unless you condemned it ALL as I did, you have no moral leg to stand on. I am supporting an African American libertarian woman who is doing what everyone should be doing… challenging ideas not cancelling them. If this guy is a pin head… CHALLENGE him. If your ideas are better they win. That’s the way civil society works. ALL ideas are on the table and all get challenged. Only fearful, authoritarian societies ban dialogue… and only authoritarians claim the right to be the moral authorities and issue condemnations in the court of public opinion. If this guy is who you say he is DEBATE him on her show.”


“But if they have bad ideas… DEBATE them like someone who actually values CIVIL society instead of being a thug who thinks they can command everyone’s moral universe…. bad ideas should be repudiated… in open debate, not mob hysteria. Of course you do. @rondeaulivia show. On Twitter. DEBATE them. debate is the way you resolve truths in a civil society… not summary judgments and relational violence.”


“Also, notice how I don’t want to cancel you even though I think the ideas you hold are illogical and immoral? I think the same thing about anarchists. Illogical and immoral, but the ideas are there because people buy them. Solution? Debate them.”

“Of course you do [want to cancel Mark]… that’s why you create narratives. You use suggestion and innuendo… guilt by association. There are no arguments. You decouple facts from context and claim to be honest. But you’re not. An honest debate IS what’s needed.”

“I don’t care about negative judgments if those judgements are based on reality. But this whole ‘I’m just presenting the facts’ line is complete BS. She makes assertions intended to cause harm, and then evades the ensuing argument, all the while claiming to be innocent. NOT.”



“Once again it’s open markets and total liberty that make racism IRRELEVANT. Racism becomes systemic by LAW AND by social concession. It would be just a few idiots if not for the rise of the new left and their ethnocentrism. And their (successful) attempts to destroy public discourse by creating an institutional monopoly. Watch racism soar as the market of ideas shrinks and the bad ones go under aground to metastasize. You wanna drive racism out DEBATE it. Show the world why it’s a shit ethos. Instead you claim it as a mantle of honor, just like ante bellum apologists… and drive dissent OUT cause you actually don’t have the tools to fight. Wake up man.”


“The person who confronted me implied I hold racist positions. It started by her pointing out the person on @rondeaulivia show. I countered thatI was supporting the show’s host who is a POC. You make it about race and then wonder why it’s about race. You are astonishingly dishonest”



“🤣 first off, no regulation means no regulation by the state. That doesn’t mean there aren’t private orgs that provide information to consumers and hold a company’s feet to the fire; nor does it mean that someone can do whatever the fuck they want… and the existence of competitive options makes that stupid kind of exploitation much less likely. In fact, the regulatory state incentivizes all the evils you claim to hate: monopoly power, exploitation, price collusion, you name it.. responsibility is diffused through bureaucracies that are being peoples by and bought by industry. Your way is a scam.”


Social engineering

“Why is it that Michael Jordan has better genes than me? Why didn’t I have a dad? Why am I not equal to myself on different days? Come on. There is no such thing as equality of opportunity even if we all came from the same goddamn LAB… there is only equal freedom.”

“If you’re talking about me personally. I was raised by a single mother in f*cking VanNuys. I started working unofficially at twelve.. officially at 151/2… I was doing my own laundry and cooking at 10… I’ve worked four jobs at a time and couldn’t pay rent. That’s LIFE To you liberty is about removing the conditionality of life. To me it’s about removing violence. There’s a universe between us.”

“To you liberty is about removing the conditionality of life. To me it’s about removing violence. There’s a universe between us.”

“Wrong again. I advocate for the freedom to move out of your situation and better it. You are the one who wants to stratify social orders by social engineering. No one is entitled to a second of another person’s time that they aren’t willing to give. Remember how involuntary was banned as contrary to Americanism? And here you are looking to bring it back and make it ok again so long as you got your hate in for the class you want to enslave to the entitlement of others. Come out of the Middle Ages man. Leftist political hatred s are so old world *involuntary servitude.”

“Nope. Your response is to steal. Mine is to remove impediments to a persons progress. Which is better your violence, or my liberty?”


Public ownership

“Always the same bullshit. It’s like y’all read from the same manual and never bother to check whether that manual is confirmed by reality. Public schooling is a historically recent phenomenon (in the states) where only Massachusetts had public schooling (so its citizens could read the Bible… and yet… literacy was far better in the colonies than it is today (where 90% of our students cannot read and cypher at grade level). Likewise, roads, canals and bridges aka infrastructure was private (and is still privately contracted though funds r publicly allotted… and of course, since this (like schools) became a gov expenditure, maintenance of infrastructure has fallen way off… hospitals, likewise have been gutted by Medicare and Medicaid. Centralized systems (which deprive entrepreneurs of the price system and so deprive us of the proper allotment of resources) cannot be flexible in times of crisis.. that’s why massive lockdowns… systems that had choked supply by controls, couldn’t meet demand when push came to shove. There was a time, 85 years ago when medicine was a market commodity that doctors came to your goddamn house to deliver services. Thanks to the regulatory state and parasitic politics… no more. As for police and army… those ARE the only proper function of the state and even those used to be funded by lotteries and fundraisers. aka subscriptions that enabled communities to deal with crises… fire services were the same.. private and linked to insurance companies. I know this will have zero meaning to a dude invested in hatred who has walked himself off against the laboratory experiment of vs relative freedom that has literally spanned the globe. The results of the experiment are obvious to anyone with a brain… that is to say a brain that hasn’t been reduced by ideological drivel of leftism.”


Please let me know if you spot any copy+paste errors (or I’ve missed a great tweet that should be included): or @plnetpellegrino