The point is that those questions were assembled to provide an immanent critique of the policy, and the posing of the questions was in order to carry out a dialectical analysis while you answered with the material factors that existed at the time thus fulfilling a dialectical materialist analysis.

You need dialectics to know where to look, as it were, to understand how to shape your analysis and what questions need asking, and how to handle the answers your investigation generates. The study of dialectics makes us better at knowing how to carry out an immanent critique, what questions to ask, and how to interpret results. The philosophical underpinning for how to do analysis and how to interpret data is vital as far as I'm concerned, I think as Stalin put it: to have a compass that allows us to navigate the seas of history instead of charting a course blindly (probably butchered the analogy but I'm trying to pull it from memory).