Political Roundtable Part XXVIII

[pancakes3]

Read on Twitter

and on the opposite end of the spectrum

Read on Twitter

tell me again about how meritocratic our society is?

[FAH1223]

Pray for Lebanon... huge economic crisis, COVID-19, and now this explosion

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

[dobrojim]

and on the opposite end of the spectrum

Read on Twitter

tell me again about how meritocratic our society is?

And this quote from the linked piece demonstrates exactly why she is my fav congresswoman
(my 25 yo daughter probably prefers AOC who I definitely like but I digress)

But the key to her appeal is not just that she is a skilled questioner; it’s that when she is skewering JPMorgan Chase CEO and chairman of the board Jamie Dimon, HUD Secretary Ben Carson, or Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg, she isn’t just speaking to the American people—she is speaking for us. Porter is our collective rage personified. And damn, if it doesn’t feel good to see her make witnesses squirm.

[Ruzious]

It's amazing Porter is just a freshman. She graduated from both Yale and Harvard - and still sounds smart. Future Speaker of the House?

[dobrojim]

I love in the article where she instructs her staff on language, how
it needs to be simplified. She understands the goal is not to impress
people by using big or trendy words but rather to be understood
by everyday people

[Zonkerbl]

For folks really frustrated with their inability to convince folks who are obviously wrong on the intertubes:

https://harvardbsc.simplecast.com/episodes/episode-6-managing-difficult-conversations-effectively

was just given this as a homework assignment by a Harvard consultant. It's really interesting and insightful.

tldr you can't convince people of anything if you don't show that you're listening.2. one of the things to listen for is how people identify themselves.

So you don't ask questions like "why are you a racist?" but "why do you identify as a Trump supporter?" and you have to actually listen and believe it's possible for someone to feel the way they do.

Like Popper I totally get why a union member who was basically abandoned by the Dems would feel betrayed by them but also not want to sign on with the Republicans who are the ones who actively murdered the unions. But Trump says he'll represent people like you - people who used to be middle class in the sixties and seventies, and now you and your family are actively worse off than you were before. The large majority of these people are non-college educated whites, and nobody cares about these non-college-educated white people except Trump.

There's a lesson in here for people like Nate as well - Nate isn't convincing because he doesn't listen. When we say something is racist he gets outraged and offended instead of saying "why would you say that? what does racism mean to you?" And it just drips out of everything he says that he doesn't actually care what any of our opinions are, he's just pumping out (easily disproven) facts at us, like the podcast says is the least effective way of convincing people. But we're guilty of the same thing on our side. All of Twitter is guilty of it.

One of the worst things to say to a Trump supporter is "That's racist." Not because it's incorrect but because Trump supporters self identify as good people and being racist is bad, so the opposite of their self identification. So the Trump supporter immediately goes into defensive shutdown mode, so I can't really blame Nate for doing it. Not that's it's wrong to call people out for racism. But it's not an effective persuasion tactic.

[pancakes3]

weird how white libs on average are better at owning their racist acts in acts of self assessment and self betterment but white republicans to a man will tell you to f*ck off or start spouting off cherrypicked statistics to back up their racist views.

i appreciate what you're saying, Zonk, but in the year of our lord 2020, coming on sixty years after the civil rights act, POC are pretty dang tired of bearing the burden of persuasion. yeah we catch more flies with honey than vinegar but why are we bothering catching flies? why is it on non-racist people to facilitate the dialogue in a way that's most beneficial for the racists? yes, it can be done, as that article lays out, but the real problem is that racism needs to be argued through. It's like trying to convince 40% of the population to not touch a hot stove or stick forks into electrical sockets.

And yeah, if that's condescending, it's meant to be. Stop being racist, you dummies.

[pancakes3]

there's a story out of minnesota where cops were on the lookout for a stolen vehicle (motorcycle with out of state tags) and pulled over a black family driving an minnosota-tagged SUV. pulled guns on them. luckily nobody was arrested or killed but how disheartening was it to read the avalanche of "they're just doing their jobs" comments, saying that cops throughout are most fearful of traffic stops.

putting aside the context that this is clearly not the vehicle they're looking for, how about we examine what "their job" is?

if i'm calling in to report my car as stolen, i'm not calling to cops to tell them to hunt down and murder the guy who stole my car. i'm reporting it because i want my car back. no need to pump my car full of bullet holes in an attempt to arrest the guy - just get me my car back. THAT'S the job. the arrest, and punishing the criminal is secondary, or even ancillary.

the same goes for just about every other traffic stop. speeding? get their tags, and fine them remotely. expired tags? ditto. broken taillight? ALL of that.

you'd have to be some kind of lunatic to willfully pull someone over if you legitimately fear for your life every time it happens. and the institution enabling this, the Police at large, is an evil organization when they choose to needlessly subject their workers to these conditions unnecessarily.

we know why cops do traffic stops. it's not to enforce traffic laws. traffic stops are pretext for cops to pull over people they have "reasonable suspicion" that there are larger crimes at play - drugs, specifically. nobody pulls over a bugati for reasonable suspicion of insider trading or tax evasion. this is the institutional racism that people are railing about, but have a difficult time articulating. the police are willing to disproportionately increase their likelihood of dying (both institutionally and individually) so they can make drug arrests - an arrest that has been thoroughly proven time and time again statistically to disproportionately affect black and latino men than any other demographic.

how about we stop doing that?

[gtn130]

Right wingers have constructed a universe in which anything short of lynching someone while wearing a klan outfit is *not* racist. Ask basically any right winger to define racism beyond physically harming someone because of their skin color while identifying with an extremist organization and they won't be able to.

It's for that reason that I don't see the point in trying to persuade anyone who has already gone down that rabbit hole. Even if you get them to admit to some basic facts in a Clockwork Orange type fashion where you have to literally pry their eyes open and force them to momentarily acknowledge reality, they'll still return to their right wing media safe space at the end of the discussion and erase all internal record of the dialog they just had.

People have the ability to choose their own reality now, and mentally weak, intellectually incurious people are totally unreachable.

[Zonkerbl]

I mean, it depends on the context. I'm not going to sit down with Donald Trump and ask him how he really feels. If I were in a room alone w Donald Trump... well. Convincing him to change his mind would not be the first thing I would think of.

If I were having a beer with Nate or Popper though... I mean if you feel the reason racism is still a problem is because people like Nate and Popper are good but misguided people who need to be *persuaded* then here is a tool you can use to do that. If you feel that all of these people are full of hate and are monsters and persuasion is not an option than I suppose you can try something else. And yeah you're not going to counter decades worth of Fox News brainwashing over one beer. I will just note in passing that I asked some Palestinian folks on the intertubes back in the 1990s why they didn't consider non-violent protest and they said non violent protest only works on good people with consciences and Israelis are evil monsters and non violent protest won't accomplish anything. Not that non violent protest is going to guarantee success or anything (or that there hasn't been any non violent protest by Palestinians, because there has) but I found it a very revealing thing to say. And here we are twenty years later and interestingly, there is not yet peace in the Middle East. I agree with the Palestinians on a lot of their root cause grievances, I think Israel has done a lot of evil things to them. But considering your opponents as monsters who can't be reasoned with is how you get into a never ending terrorist insurgency. Treating your opponents like monsters plays right into the monsters hands. "See what these inferior people are doing to us? They deserve to be oppressed!" A good way to guarantee the evil regime you are fighting against stays in power *over you* forever.

Ah well I'm whitesplaining. But that's what I think, based off of my many decades of experience arguing with people on the internet.

I'm not saying lay down and let white people take their own damn time absorbing what you have to say. Sometimes a good punch in the face is a good way to get the attention of someone who is just not listening. I'm not saying don't ever punch Nazis. Always punch Nazis. Nazis need to know there are consequences for choosing to be a Nazi. But there is also work that can and should be done with people who are persuadable, and you can't know ahead of time which ones those are. If you assume they're all unpersuadable monsters you've already lost the game.

[Ruzious]

I mean, it depends on the context. I'm not going to sit down with Donald Trump and ask him how he really feels. If I were in a room alone w Donald Trump... well. Convincing him to change his mind would not be the first thing I would think of.

If I were having a beer with Nate or Popper though... I mean if you feel the reason racism is still a problem is because people like Nate and Popper are good but misguided people who need to be *persuaded* then here is a tool you can use to do that. If you feel that all of these people are full of hate and are monsters and persuasion is not an option than I suppose you can try something else. And yeah you're not going to counter decades worth of Fox News brainwashing over one beer. I will just note in passing that I asked some Palestinian folks on the intertubes back in the 1990s why they didn't consider non-violent protest and they said non violent protest only works on good people with consciences and Israelis are evil monsters and non violent protest won't accomplish anything. Not that non violent protest is going to guarantee success or anything (or that there hasn't been any non violent protest by Palestinians, because there has) but I found it a very revealing thing to say. And here we are twenty years later and interestingly, there is not yet peace in the Middle East. I agree with the Palestinians on a lot of their root cause grievances, I think Israel has done a lot of evil things to them. But considering your opponents as monsters who can't be reasoned with is how you get into a never ending terrorist insurgency. Treating your opponents like monsters plays right into the monsters hands. "See what these inferior people are doing to us? They deserve to be oppressed!" A good way to guarantee the evil regime you are fighting against stays in power *over you* forever.

Ah well I'm whitesplaining. But that's what I think, based off of my many decades of experience arguing with people on the internet.

I'm not saying lay down and let white people take their own damn time absorbing what you have to say. Sometimes a good punch in the face is a good way to get the attention of someone who is just not listening. I'm not saying don't ever punch Nazis. Always punch Nazis. But there is also work that can and should be done with people who are persuadable, and you can't know ahead of time which ones those are. If you assume they're all unpersuadable monsters you've already lost the game.

Very well said. The other way makes us feel better, but it doesn't accomplish anything. Just listening to the other side is hard - but it's important. https://www.compassionatelistening.org/

[Zonkerbl]

I guess what I'm saying is always try to listen to people first, especially the ones who are, you know, stupidly/ignorantly racist instead of performatively racist. And you get to set your own boundaries as to how much bs you're willing to listen to.

[Zonkerbl]

And it's not like I've been a great example of this. I just listened to the podcast today and was like "huh this sounds like a good idea."

[doclinkin]

And it's not like I've been a great example of this. I just listened to the podcast today and was like "huh this sounds like a good idea."

Ha! Right, and it's not like doc has ever said anything to that effect. When I'd engage in good faith even with people who were arguing in bad faith but occasionally manage to squeeze a drop of empathy or an admission of error out of them based on actually hearing what they said. Even if what they said amounts to a one note argument that say 'abortion is bad' which justifies every other position they hold..

[DCZards]

I long ago stopped trying to convince racists not to be racists. It's a colossal waste of valuable time and energy, imo. I'd much rather spend that energy doing everything that I can as a Black man to overcome racism and its deleterious effects--and to help my community overcome it.

When it comes to racists, I often think about these words from one of my favorite songwriters and singers--Terry Callier.

"How can you change the people's hearts when you can't even change their minds."

[Pointgod]

For folks really frustrated with their inability to convince folks who are obviously wrong on the intertubes:

https://harvardbsc.simplecast.com/episodes/episode-6-managing-difficult-conversations-effectively

was just given this as a homework assignment by a Harvard consultant. It's really interesting and insightful.

tldr you can't convince people of anything if you don't show that you're listening.2. one of the things to listen for is how people identify themselves.

So you don't ask questions like "why are you a racist?" but "why do you identify as a Trump supporter?" and you have to actually listen and believe it's possible for someone to feel the way they do.

Like Popper I totally get why a union member who was basically abandoned by the Dems would feel betrayed by them but also not want to sign on with the Republicans who are the ones who actively murdered the unions. But Trump says he'll represent people like you - people who used to be middle class in the sixties and seventies, and now you and your family are actively worse off than you were before. The large majority of these people are non-college educated whites, and nobody cares about these non-college-educated white people except Trump.

There's a lesson in here for people like Nate as well - Nate isn't convincing because he doesn't listen. When we say something is racist he gets outraged and offended instead of saying "why would you say that? what does racism mean to you?" And it just drips out of everything he says that he doesn't actually care what any of our opinions are, he's just pumping out (easily disproven) facts at us, like the podcast says is the least effective way of convincing people. But we're guilty of the same thing on our side. All of Twitter is guilty of it.

One of the worst things to say to a Trump supporter is "That's racist." Not because it's incorrect but because Trump supporters self identify as good people and being racist is bad, so the opposite of their self identification. So the Trump supporter immediately goes into defensive shutdown mode, so I can't really blame Nate for doing it. Not that's it's wrong to call people out for racism. But it's not an effective persuasion tactic.

Here’s where your analysis completely falls apart. People of colour have suffered every single one of these hardships that as well, sometimes even orders of magnitudes worse, always disproportionately worse. Yet you don’t see them supporting a blatant racist like Trump in significant numbers or blaming other marginalized communities like undocumented immigrants or LGTBQ communities. In fact you don’t see them advocating for punishing whites people or disadvantaging white people. It’s impossible to have a Donald Trump of the left. The difference is that non white people want EQUALITY and EQUITY.

So the reason that you’ll never reach the racist Trump supporters is because they see everything through the prism of white supremacy. That’s not to say they’re white supremacists but that their whole world is centred around whiteness. White people must be on top, equality always comes at the expense of white people (completely ignoring others) and they can’t understand that there are policies that can benefit all races or meritocracy ignores different starting points. When everything is filtered through that paradigm, then it’s impossible to have a conversation.

[payitforward]

This is a nice interlude on this thread. I agree with all the last several posts.

No surprise, I suppose -- Zonkerbl in particular is pretty much always the source of interesting posts.

[Ruzious]

I long ago stopped trying to convince racists not to be racists. It's a colossal waste of valuable time and energy, imo. I'd much rather spend that energy doing everything that I can as a Black man to overcome racism and its deleterious effects--and to help my community overcome it.

When it comes to racists, I often think about these words from one of my favorite songwriters and singers--Terry Callier.

"How can you change the people's hearts when you can't even change their minds."

You almost have to go the other way first - like when these hardcore Republicans are so much against gay rights and suddenly have a change of heart when they realize their daughter is gay. They had to feel it before they could change their thought processes.

[Zonkerbl]

And it's not like I've been a great example of this. I just listened to the podcast today and was like "huh this sounds like a good idea."

Ha! Right, and it's not like doc has ever said anything to that effect. When I'd engage in good faith even with people who were arguing in bad faith but occasionally manage to squeeze a drop of empathy or an admission of error out of them based on actually hearing what they said. Even if what they said amounts to a one note argument that say 'abortion is bad' which justifies every other position they hold..

I gotta say, I love treating this thread like thunderdome and just crushing people and sending them crying for their mommies. And talking trash about it afterwards.

But yeah it doesn't accomplish much other than making me feel awesome.

[payitforward]

Makes sense, Ruz -- but it won't scale. & you can say the same thing about conversations to change people's minds, however you hold them.

What does scale, & also makes sense, is to change structural stuff. Vote racists out of office, pass good laws, & enforce them.

The structural changes set in motion by the civil rights movement are a solid example. Things have changed -- not enough, not nearly enough, but there has been change.

Theories like racism emerge to justify social & political processes. The aims of those processes are related to power & wealth; racism is just there to make those practices look like they reflect "nature."