Soliciting ideas on the best ways to subvert the subversion of family and friends through comments and Substack Live, plus the 6-part series from the archive
But I do think there are times NOT to discuss or reason for sake of peace and/or sanity. My Dad and I had an unwritten rule not to discuss politics (or to do so very sparingly) because we got into bad arguments. This rule worked pretty well.
Thankfully, in his advanced age, he has gotten slightly red-pilled so we can have amicable conversations now although he is still a Democrat.
The problem is overcoming inertia. It is a very powerful, perhaps the most powerful, force. Old Yuri and Mark Twain pretty much nailed it. It affects perceptions of reality, including but not limited to media consumed. I don't know how to break its grip. Certainly not by arguing or even pointing out small cracks in the narrative. People need to get there on their own which may never happen. Collapse or religious revival seem like two mechanisms that might work.
For my ESL classes I've taught from Never Split the Difference, Crucial Conversations, Nonviolent Communication, The Courage to be Disliked, How to Win Friends and Influence People, That's Not What I Said, and more. These books give excellent advice and I've internalized it fairly well, but I've still lost friends over political disagreements. I'll read your essays on the subject. I need all the help I can get.
1. Group discussions among people with a collectivist mindset, and/or people who are controlled by consensus group dynamics, i.e. most of your lefty friends and family, are usually a bad (i.e. losing) idea. As has been previously noted, men go mad in crowds and recover their senses one by one. Deal with them one by one, not with the mob.
2. Find something you can agree on, that calls into question the reliability of the media, the ethics & morality of the political class, the altruistic impulses of the moneyed class, etc. Find something as damning as possible that calls these into question, that you can agree on. Slowly, assuming the person is at all mentally functional, this will bleed over into their other information sources and associated data points. This leads to:
3. Don't ever try to give people ANSWERS, especially when those answers conflict glaringly with everything they think they believe. Ask them QUESTIONS and try to plant seeds in their minds that will cause them to ask questions. This is the first step to skepticism, and one day they might hatch out into a beautiful cynic like me. :I
4. Love your enemies, sure, but understand that you cannot save people from themselves. By practice and experiment you will learn the telltale signs of who can (probably) be saved and who cannot.
5. Finally, never make that judgement from point 4 as a final diagnosis but rather treat it as a tentative contingent very loosely-held "today's opinion". People can and will surprise you. Some people you thought salvageable will try to kill you for having a wrong opinion, some people you thought would never change will end up leading the revolution.
Those are words of wisdom and good working conversation basics. I tried to add in the chat to check out braverangels.org. There are folks there that do you have left/blues, progressive perspectives but I’m noticing some tend to call themselves more purple after a while. It’s a good forum to practice these things you suggest because the participants tend to have an interest in the conversation.
As for sharing data and information, we in Sonoma County California are going to have an online quote walk a mile in my news” where a left and right will pair off and share our sources to find out what they are for one and get an understanding of why they think they do and share why we think we do.
I spent a long time hassling Jimmy Dore, mocking him openly in his comments and on X (before I was banned ... again) over his belief in climate change when the people pushing it were the same people who were lying to him about everything all the time.
I'm not claiming to be responsible for his flowering skepticism over climate alarmism and its ruinous policy responses, but he's there now. He's now starting to question, and becoming more cynical over the politics of climate change.
As a public figure his situation is a little different and we're not friends or family. We've never met. So the approach was different from above and the probability of success probably also a lot lower. But again, I'm not claiming success, just showing that people CAN and DO change.
I like Jimmy even though I disagree with most of his political positions, because he's fundamentally honest. None of the above will work with people when they're committed to lying to themselves.
The best advice! Number 3 is especially important, but oh so difficult at times. I am always tempted to hit people with information. It only works if they’ve heard it somewhere else first. But a lot of people don’t seek out news or information. Instead they seem to get their opinions by osmosis. ‘What does everyone think? I think that’s probably true.’ Masks were a great example of that.
Lefties have been programmed not to engage with "conspiracy theorists" so it's almost impossible to have a conversation with them about anything of substance. I just keep the conversation about safe boring topics like the weather, movies, hobbies, etc. My normie friendships and family relationships have therefore become very superficial. But it's either that or nothing. I do drop the occasional mini truth to keep them from being totally propogandized but it's a very slow process. I mostly try to show by example to become self reliant with my homesteading, food forest and investing in metals and crypto.
My two dearest friends are very very liberal. When Trump won, they had a meltdown and thought President Trump and conservatives were going to put them in camps - one told me he literally 'feared for his life' and could not believe I supported this. I knew he was going to make me out to be the enemy so I gave him time to cool off.
We talked eventually and I said that I should be gauged on the culmination of my actions. Having conservative beliefs does not preclude me from a moral responsibility to treat others as I wish to be treated, regardless of a person's beliefs or orientation. I asked him when had I ever treated him or anyone else in a fashion that was not moral because I didn't agree with the person's beliefs. He thought about it, met me in the middle. Thank heavens.
As a freeloader here who didn't listen to the conversation, I have a report on a conversation I had with a friend this morning.
This friend and I both work for the same company. Both of us have a long history of dealing with government owned businesses as well as publicly traded or privately owned businesses.
We both have a lot of shared experience dealing with the abject incompetence in those organizations.
In discussing that bad guy in the Whitehouse, I brought up, in a variety of ways, the question of knowing if the narrative we've been fed is even right or not and if it has been consistent over time. If it hasn't been consistent, then it probably isn't true and you can't trust the people saying it.
I did bring up the inconsistency between what we know about the general quality of the people we deal with weekly. I asked how he could hold both the idea that some of what he hears is trustworthy while he and I both know that other parts of government owned stuff is populated with the lazy, the idiot? He did share that there was a bunch of stuff that in the beginning of Covid Era he wanted to believe was true but is having a harder time with that now.
Advice: Persistence, Love, at least on those close to us. Jesus said that we should lay down our lives for our friends. "Lay down" is too frequently thought of as merely dying. The far harder part is to go back into a conversation like this and give up on detachment and indifference because those are emotionally easier.
First, learn to differentiate between those who have thrown logic and reason out the window, and those who still use them, however slightly. Don't bother with the former, and concentrate on the latter.
I ask them what they want, and if they give a coherent answer I describe a better way to get it. It's all positive and plants a seed of hope. If they actually want to change, that seed of hope will gnaw at them. If they don't want to change (just want to hate and blame) then you're SOL and must categorize them as an enemy combatant.
Douglas Murray recently had a good comment on the difficulty of reasoning with someone who is unreasonable: It’s a process. Don’t expect an immediate “aha” moment or for someone to change their mind quickly. Plant a small idea and wait for it to sink in. This certainly requires great patience. ( I have tried this and, unfortunately, even a seemingly innocuous comment brought an angry response. But I will try again. I will bolster my patience.)
Transcriber B's current post https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/206484.html has a nurse who knew better, but let her sunk costs override everything. And so she allowed herself be be injured.
All her subsequent utterances such as "Don't judge anyone for their decisions" are shields to let her self-justify her lack of personal accountability. I don't believe there's anything to say to people in that stage of personal development, as the outside world can't penetrate her internal world.
I just tell they how stupid they are, make fun of them, and cut them off. I'm too busy and don't have the time to try to cure them of their stupidity. If they don't "get it" by now, they never will.
It's also a matter of self-preservation to take this approach. These people are actually dangerous.
But I do think there are times NOT to discuss or reason for sake of peace and/or sanity. My Dad and I had an unwritten rule not to discuss politics (or to do so very sparingly) because we got into bad arguments. This rule worked pretty well.
Thankfully, in his advanced age, he has gotten slightly red-pilled so we can have amicable conversations now although he is still a Democrat.
The problem is overcoming inertia. It is a very powerful, perhaps the most powerful, force. Old Yuri and Mark Twain pretty much nailed it. It affects perceptions of reality, including but not limited to media consumed. I don't know how to break its grip. Certainly not by arguing or even pointing out small cracks in the narrative. People need to get there on their own which may never happen. Collapse or religious revival seem like two mechanisms that might work.
For my ESL classes I've taught from Never Split the Difference, Crucial Conversations, Nonviolent Communication, The Courage to be Disliked, How to Win Friends and Influence People, That's Not What I Said, and more. These books give excellent advice and I've internalized it fairly well, but I've still lost friends over political disagreements. I'll read your essays on the subject. I need all the help I can get.
1. Group discussions among people with a collectivist mindset, and/or people who are controlled by consensus group dynamics, i.e. most of your lefty friends and family, are usually a bad (i.e. losing) idea. As has been previously noted, men go mad in crowds and recover their senses one by one. Deal with them one by one, not with the mob.
2. Find something you can agree on, that calls into question the reliability of the media, the ethics & morality of the political class, the altruistic impulses of the moneyed class, etc. Find something as damning as possible that calls these into question, that you can agree on. Slowly, assuming the person is at all mentally functional, this will bleed over into their other information sources and associated data points. This leads to:
3. Don't ever try to give people ANSWERS, especially when those answers conflict glaringly with everything they think they believe. Ask them QUESTIONS and try to plant seeds in their minds that will cause them to ask questions. This is the first step to skepticism, and one day they might hatch out into a beautiful cynic like me. :I
4. Love your enemies, sure, but understand that you cannot save people from themselves. By practice and experiment you will learn the telltale signs of who can (probably) be saved and who cannot.
5. Finally, never make that judgement from point 4 as a final diagnosis but rather treat it as a tentative contingent very loosely-held "today's opinion". People can and will surprise you. Some people you thought salvageable will try to kill you for having a wrong opinion, some people you thought would never change will end up leading the revolution.
Those are words of wisdom and good working conversation basics. I tried to add in the chat to check out braverangels.org. There are folks there that do you have left/blues, progressive perspectives but I’m noticing some tend to call themselves more purple after a while. It’s a good forum to practice these things you suggest because the participants tend to have an interest in the conversation.
As for sharing data and information, we in Sonoma County California are going to have an online quote walk a mile in my news” where a left and right will pair off and share our sources to find out what they are for one and get an understanding of why they think they do and share why we think we do.
I spent a long time hassling Jimmy Dore, mocking him openly in his comments and on X (before I was banned ... again) over his belief in climate change when the people pushing it were the same people who were lying to him about everything all the time.
I'm not claiming to be responsible for his flowering skepticism over climate alarmism and its ruinous policy responses, but he's there now. He's now starting to question, and becoming more cynical over the politics of climate change.
As a public figure his situation is a little different and we're not friends or family. We've never met. So the approach was different from above and the probability of success probably also a lot lower. But again, I'm not claiming success, just showing that people CAN and DO change.
I like Jimmy even though I disagree with most of his political positions, because he's fundamentally honest. None of the above will work with people when they're committed to lying to themselves.
The best advice! Number 3 is especially important, but oh so difficult at times. I am always tempted to hit people with information. It only works if they’ve heard it somewhere else first. But a lot of people don’t seek out news or information. Instead they seem to get their opinions by osmosis. ‘What does everyone think? I think that’s probably true.’ Masks were a great example of that.
Thank you for these - gives me hope, but reminds me to keep my expectations in check.
Lefties have been programmed not to engage with "conspiracy theorists" so it's almost impossible to have a conversation with them about anything of substance. I just keep the conversation about safe boring topics like the weather, movies, hobbies, etc. My normie friendships and family relationships have therefore become very superficial. But it's either that or nothing. I do drop the occasional mini truth to keep them from being totally propogandized but it's a very slow process. I mostly try to show by example to become self reliant with my homesteading, food forest and investing in metals and crypto.
Having no conversations with them at all is even better. You should try it.
My two dearest friends are very very liberal. When Trump won, they had a meltdown and thought President Trump and conservatives were going to put them in camps - one told me he literally 'feared for his life' and could not believe I supported this. I knew he was going to make me out to be the enemy so I gave him time to cool off.
We talked eventually and I said that I should be gauged on the culmination of my actions. Having conservative beliefs does not preclude me from a moral responsibility to treat others as I wish to be treated, regardless of a person's beliefs or orientation. I asked him when had I ever treated him or anyone else in a fashion that was not moral because I didn't agree with the person's beliefs. He thought about it, met me in the middle. Thank heavens.
As a freeloader here who didn't listen to the conversation, I have a report on a conversation I had with a friend this morning.
This friend and I both work for the same company. Both of us have a long history of dealing with government owned businesses as well as publicly traded or privately owned businesses.
We both have a lot of shared experience dealing with the abject incompetence in those organizations.
In discussing that bad guy in the Whitehouse, I brought up, in a variety of ways, the question of knowing if the narrative we've been fed is even right or not and if it has been consistent over time. If it hasn't been consistent, then it probably isn't true and you can't trust the people saying it.
I did bring up the inconsistency between what we know about the general quality of the people we deal with weekly. I asked how he could hold both the idea that some of what he hears is trustworthy while he and I both know that other parts of government owned stuff is populated with the lazy, the idiot? He did share that there was a bunch of stuff that in the beginning of Covid Era he wanted to believe was true but is having a harder time with that now.
Advice: Persistence, Love, at least on those close to us. Jesus said that we should lay down our lives for our friends. "Lay down" is too frequently thought of as merely dying. The far harder part is to go back into a conversation like this and give up on detachment and indifference because those are emotionally easier.
First, learn to differentiate between those who have thrown logic and reason out the window, and those who still use them, however slightly. Don't bother with the former, and concentrate on the latter.
Thank you, Yuri!
Thank you
I ask them what they want, and if they give a coherent answer I describe a better way to get it. It's all positive and plants a seed of hope. If they actually want to change, that seed of hope will gnaw at them. If they don't want to change (just want to hate and blame) then you're SOL and must categorize them as an enemy combatant.
Douglas Murray recently had a good comment on the difficulty of reasoning with someone who is unreasonable: It’s a process. Don’t expect an immediate “aha” moment or for someone to change their mind quickly. Plant a small idea and wait for it to sink in. This certainly requires great patience. ( I have tried this and, unfortunately, even a seemingly innocuous comment brought an angry response. But I will try again. I will bolster my patience.)
This post has relevance to this “How to Reason with a Demoralized Person”:
https://joshketry.substack.com/p/word-jiu-jitsu-techniques
I walk as a citizen,but i think like a dissident,and i strike( the legal system) like an insurgent,when&where i can.and i walk
Transcriber B's current post https://transcriberb.dreamwidth.org/206484.html has a nurse who knew better, but let her sunk costs override everything. And so she allowed herself be be injured.
All her subsequent utterances such as "Don't judge anyone for their decisions" are shields to let her self-justify her lack of personal accountability. I don't believe there's anything to say to people in that stage of personal development, as the outside world can't penetrate her internal world.
I just tell they how stupid they are, make fun of them, and cut them off. I'm too busy and don't have the time to try to cure them of their stupidity. If they don't "get it" by now, they never will.
It's also a matter of self-preservation to take this approach. These people are actually dangerous.