Some of you have been talking about how to argue with the far left, and how to deal with emotions versus reason. I've come across a book by Greg Gutfeld called How To Be Right. I haven't bought it yet but am planning to. One of his strategies is to 
utcompassion them:. You take a liberal's sacred group and demonstrate how your approach/policy will actually benefit that group more than the current approach/policy. For instance, if you say that third-wave feminism ends up hurting women in the end, they will be more interested in listening than if you say that all feminists are idiots. Has anyone here read it? Or have you got your own ways of getting through that have worked?
[amzn.to]
8
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
2 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.I really like GG ...
On the other hand, if you canât get your response out in less than 10 words, all a (fill in the blank) will hear is;
W..wh...wha...wha...w...whaaaa... (I learned that from Schultzâs Peanuts Cartoon)
However, itâs true ... after the first few words theyâre more likely to be wondering how many âlikesâ the stupid meme they posted on Facebook got than listening to you ... they already have an answer they were fed previously cued up and ready as soon as they hear you stop talking.
Seriously ... once you see their eyeballs go fuzzy ... try (without changing your tone) sticking in some totally ridiculous but innocuous phrase like âmy puppyâs jewels are made of pink yarnâ and see if they catch it. If they do you can always say you were âjust checkingâ (because, in fact, you were)
Bay0Wulf
Level 8
Apr 2, 2019
2
Hi. I would be very interested in reading the book - thank you!
A few days ago, I was reading a news article about the New Zealand attacks on FB. The article was clearly generating a Muslims vs Christian type of notion - typical. I got a little mischievous, and dropped a comment "My heart goes out for the families of the victims who lost their lives amidst the mosque shootings." (I meant it!) to see if I would get any reaction. Sure enough, one white lady (I could tell by her profile photo and assumed she was Christian) reacted and said "How dare you! Stop virtue signaling. How many Christians do you think were killed by Muslims during this and that, not to mention the 9/11?!" So, I replied "What virtue signaling? I don't even know what it means. Plus, what is so wrong with expressing condolences to those who're going through very difficult times, regardless of their identities? It sounds like you've fallen into the very narrative of identity politics." I had no comeback.
Black vs white, male vs female, Muslim vs non-Muslim... Everything is down to identities. We cannot not talk about identity politics. This is the work of ideologues. This is the mindset they want us to have. This is their narrative we keep sleepwalking into. We're dividing ourselves. We have to wake up.
Naomi
Level 8
Apr 2, 2019
0
What article was that? I also sent my condolences but also mentioned that I would also like to send my condolences to the families of the 20 Christians that were also murdered the same week in the Philipines. There was not any publicity on those families. It is the medias job to cover all stories. I can understand and relate to the ladies response because it is a known fact that thousand of Christians have been murdered since January 1st in Africa and other countries such as the Philippines with no mention in the media. All these tragedies should be acknowledged so that maybe there can be some common and honest dialogue to maybe prevent them from happening again. Instead we are focusing on one group. There has to be honest and open dialogue.
You're absolutely right. The point I was trying to make is that media create the notion of favouring minorities over majorities and vise versa and we keep falling for that mind game. Say, you sympathise with rape victims in the ethnic minority and there is always someone who says "how about white rape victims?", and you speak for white people and there is always someone who says "how about black people?" and so on. Identity politics, cultural Marxism, political correctness, call it what you like, but it is this mind set that makes us talk about people by their identities, and I think it's dividing us.
@Naomi I think that the suggestion of JBP and Jonathan Haidt applies here, that we need to approach others assuming they have fundamentally good intentions - at least most, even if we find their opinions unpalatable. That takes the sting out of the conversation. As you correctly say, we need to see people's humanity beneath the label.
Thank goodness, you see my point! LOL
Sounds like you've read Jonathan Haidt' s books. I call him "my lovely Jonathan". LOL
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
Share this post
Related Groups More
Feminism = cancer
474 members
Categories
Slug does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.