They’re not operating on logic. They listen to media which is shouting all this stuff at them, in a carefully engineered format which plays on their emotions and is carefully packaged to make it sound like the most logical thing in the world.
DEI is ruining America. They’re hiring air traffic controllers who can’t do the job, they’re killing people crashing planes just because they got hired because they’re black, same with the LA fires, something must be done, oh thank God Trump is going to finally fix it. That’s about as far as it goes. Any kind of factual analysis about whether those things are actually happening or not, or even about is it internally consistent, gets aggressively thrown out the window.
“Like sure, small government, it’s great and all, but you can’t possibly be telling me the government can’t mandate that the ATC controllers need to be qualified. Right? Is that what you’re telling me? That’s insane. You’re killing people. Can’t you see that’s insane?” And then some kind of a rant that simply will not stop. You can either interrupt with enough force to match the emotional level, at which point it’s a yelling match or you’re being super unreasonable about it and nothing gets accomplished anyway, or you can let it continue. Forever.
The number of times I’ve seen someone successfully have this type of conversation is very limited. All I can really say is, it takes a bunch of times talking about it, not just once, and you have to be very strategic about both your overall emotional tone and empathy involved, and also the factual backing of what you’re saying and when to knock down particular arguments (and stick to it, because they will instantly deflect to something else, before you’re even done with half the first sentence) with something that will resonate with them factually.
You’re going up against a professionally-produced machine which has produced a system in their brain that’s self-sustaining with particular features that make it very hard to talk them out of, once they’re in it. It’s tough.
But I was told that I need to engage with those people and seek to understand them, and ask them questions, because they feel ignored or something, and I should be more empathetic.
I don’t think that approach should be discarded, but one needs to see the signs of when it’s not getting through. Don’t waste time on people who are fully in the cult and are lost, but still try to get to the ones who are listening to the Sirens but haven’t jumped overboard yet. And yes, it’s often not easy to see the difference. If they can’t dig themselves out (with questions meant to make them think past the soundbites), you aren’t going to pull them out.
And I’m as pessimistic as they come, but I’ll still throw a nugget of facts into the mix of a conversation if I feel it could make a person stop and think even for a second. I take a bit of pleasure seeing the cogs jam up when it works.
Before the election, I would have agreed with you. Now, not so much. If they can’t just see it now with their own eyes, my discussion efforts are going to accomplish nilch.
No, my own efforts are now better spent paying closer attention to the world right in front of me, and watching for opportunities to make fascists experience regret and fear.
You may be right, honestly. But I do think that there is a type of echo chamber (that we’re in) that assumes people are informed or aware of things that should be obvious perhaps, but they don’t see it for whatever reason. It’s probably futile as you say, but I do like to at least leave the door cracked for the few that maybe just haven’t gotten the right information yet. And you may ask, rightly so…how the hell can anyone be that ignorant in the 21st century? I submit that it’s still very possible to have blinders on and make bad choices if your life has other priorities than what is deemed common knowledge.
It’s frustrating, regardless of which viewpoint you take. We (society as a whole) could be so much better.
They’re not operating on logic. They listen to media which is shouting all this stuff at them, in a carefully engineered format which plays on their emotions and is carefully packaged to make it sound like the most logical thing in the world.
DEI is ruining America. They’re hiring air traffic controllers who can’t do the job, they’re killing people crashing planes just because they got hired because they’re black, same with the LA fires, something must be done, oh thank God Trump is going to finally fix it. That’s about as far as it goes. Any kind of factual analysis about whether those things are actually happening or not, or even about is it internally consistent, gets aggressively thrown out the window.
“Like sure, small government, it’s great and all, but you can’t possibly be telling me the government can’t mandate that the ATC controllers need to be qualified. Right? Is that what you’re telling me? That’s insane. You’re killing people. Can’t you see that’s insane?” And then some kind of a rant that simply will not stop. You can either interrupt with enough force to match the emotional level, at which point it’s a yelling match or you’re being super unreasonable about it and nothing gets accomplished anyway, or you can let it continue. Forever.
The number of times I’ve seen someone successfully have this type of conversation is very limited. All I can really say is, it takes a bunch of times talking about it, not just once, and you have to be very strategic about both your overall emotional tone and empathy involved, and also the factual backing of what you’re saying and when to knock down particular arguments (and stick to it, because they will instantly deflect to something else, before you’re even done with half the first sentence) with something that will resonate with them factually.
You’re going up against a professionally-produced machine which has produced a system in their brain that’s self-sustaining with particular features that make it very hard to talk them out of, once they’re in it. It’s tough.
But I was told that I need to engage with those people and seek to understand them, and ask them questions, because they feel ignored or something, and I should be more empathetic.
(Not pointed at you, Phil.)
I don’t think that approach should be discarded, but one needs to see the signs of when it’s not getting through. Don’t waste time on people who are fully in the cult and are lost, but still try to get to the ones who are listening to the Sirens but haven’t jumped overboard yet. And yes, it’s often not easy to see the difference. If they can’t dig themselves out (with questions meant to make them think past the soundbites), you aren’t going to pull them out.
And I’m as pessimistic as they come, but I’ll still throw a nugget of facts into the mix of a conversation if I feel it could make a person stop and think even for a second. I take a bit of pleasure seeing the cogs jam up when it works.
Before the election, I would have agreed with you. Now, not so much. If they can’t just see it now with their own eyes, my discussion efforts are going to accomplish nilch.
No, my own efforts are now better spent paying closer attention to the world right in front of me, and watching for opportunities to make fascists experience regret and fear.
You may be right, honestly. But I do think that there is a type of echo chamber (that we’re in) that assumes people are informed or aware of things that should be obvious perhaps, but they don’t see it for whatever reason. It’s probably futile as you say, but I do like to at least leave the door cracked for the few that maybe just haven’t gotten the right information yet. And you may ask, rightly so…how the hell can anyone be that ignorant in the 21st century? I submit that it’s still very possible to have blinders on and make bad choices if your life has other priorities than what is deemed common knowledge.
It’s frustrating, regardless of which viewpoint you take. We (society as a whole) could be so much better.