Sort:  

did I say that?

You kinda did ;-). Not directly. But you implied that I was unqualified for the debate by making assumptions (which turned out to be correct) about my familiarity with what you were trying to talk about

I have met a total of 2 capitalists online that could correctly define socialism, its not just an assumption at this point.

Not like a school system run by capitalists would willingly teach people anything other than propaganda.

Like I said, the term 'correctly define' is logically corrupt - the only thing that can be true or false are the claims we derive from our definitions. Definitions are made up by the definer, and they can be anything. I admit to not taking AP Socialism, but I did have a little bit of philosophy ;-)

Ok how about this, are too stupid/lazy to understand the basic definitions of words in contexts other than fox news.

Do you still claim that you're not suggesting I'm an idiot? See two posts above. Perhaps you could share your definition of idiot?

You admitted you didn't know it, that's the difference.

oh yeah refuses was the word I was looking for, that would have portrayed my meaning better lmao, oh well

Oh please, that is absolutely what you were intending to imply with your response to his comment. Or am I to believe that you think the definition of socialism is so compelling that anyone who knows it will instantly agree with you?