"Getting a Word in"

[AnthArmo]

Recently, I've encountered a problem.

Recently, I was discussing the whole Labour party scandal that occoured only recently. (More specifically, this one (http://www.revleft.com/vb/australian-leadership-contested-t137458/index.html))

The discussion turned to why people believed that this was proof that "all politicians are scum". I decided to take the opportunity and but in with a "And they say representative democracy is truely representative..."

A nearby friend, who is more than aware of my views. Immediately jumped in and went on a "Communism doesn't work/Human Nature/Nothing works because of Human Nature/Your Naive for thinking that Human Nature doesn't exist/insert stupid cliche here". This irritated the hell out of me for three reasons.

1: It was riddled with strawmen arguments. I do in fact believe there is SOME human nature. And many of the things he threw at me were the sort of cliches that COULD be refuted, but simply take time to explain. Ignorance and stupidity is a difficult stain to clean.

2: A reason unrelated to this particular post, but related nonetheless (And it is nice to vent on RevLeft :cool:). This particular friend of mine has a habit of, whenever I make a comment of any kind in any sort of vaguely political discussion, completely changing topic and stating that everything I say is wrong because "Your a Communist and Communism doesn't work, ergo your opinion doesn't count". Its incredibly demeaning, logically stupid, and makes it impossible to discuss anything with this guy around.

3: Most importantly, (and this is the reason why I started this thread specifically), he wouldn't let me get a word in. I managed to squeak in a few "but I never said that..." or "I don't actually think that..." or "but thats dumb because..." but try as I may, I simply couldn't get a word in. Don't get me wrong, what he was saying was nonsense and wasn't even related to the topic. But I was powerless as I simply could not say anything to refute the nonsense.

This, to me, seems to be something that happens a lot. I remember seeing Sam Web in a similar situation up against Glen Beck. Everything Glen Beck was spouting was clearly complete nonesense. While Web (even though a Stalinist :P ) was at least grounded in reality, made reference to actual fact, actual laws passed etc etc. However, Beck simply overwhelmed him with stupid talking points; while Web struggled to get a word in.

In another instance. I was at the "Marxism 09" conference last year organised by the Socialist Alternative(Trots), primarily out of curiousity. Throughout the whole thing, I had this overeager activist constantly hovering around me, convincing me about how "brilliant the Bolsheviks" were. I tried to argue against her, pulling out Kronsdadt at one point, but she simply didn't allow me to get a word in. Once again, completely fustrating.

In short, I wanna know how to overcome this. This sort of crap makes arguments less about actual, Y'know, reason and debate and facts and that stuff. And more about who's the biggest, most inconsiderate loudmouth.

[ed miliband]

See, I've had to learn to calm down in situations like this. I have quite a dirty mouth and I'm hot-headed and the combination usually left me looking flustered, aggressive and really quite ignorant. I find that you almost have to be an actor; learn an argument, imagine what your opponent will respond with, and then learn how to counter that. Be prepared, be calm, and seem assertive or rather confident in your beliefs, but not violently so.

Regarding 'human nature', I find it's best to ask the person who uses this argument to clarify exactly what they mean by human nature. Then say that human nature must be a constant thing that applies to all human beings, and point out examples of people who go against your friend's description of 'human nature'. You can also say that should humans naturally be greedy, surely it is better that a system exists whereby the most powerful and ruthless don't have the right to be 'more greedy' than everybody else.

Tell your friend that your opinions count precisely because you are a communist. Ask him if he wishes to see a grey world where all voice of dissent is written off as crazy, and ask whether he thinks capitalism works, if communism is such an insane, unworkable idea.

But yeah, always be on the ball - know what you will say and how you will say it.

[Broletariat]

Whenever people do shit like that to me I walk off and when they try and stop me I respond with something along the lines of "Oh I thought you were just talking to yourself at this point and didn't want to interrupt"

[Nothing Human Is Alien]

There's not a lot of point in debating folks who are rabidly opposed to proletarian revolution, unless perhaps you had some sort of audience.

Remember too that revolution isn't a religious doctrine that people will be converted to, but an unfolding process.

[redmist]

Not always the best advice but just kick off at him, don't know the bloke personally but with aggressive speakers something just being more aggressive that can work. But like aufkleben said, know what you want to say and how you are going to say it, regardless of if you are pissed off or not, it's fairly basic to any argument.

Just try different things though mate, sometimes it's good to be more aggressive than them, other times it just works to shut up, remember what they say and work over it after they are out of gas.

[Wanted Man]

Unfortunately, there are plenty of incredibly pushy and dogmatic people, especially among "fellow leftists". :p

Anyway, sometimes it's just not worth it to argue every silly little point. In discussions like that, you might as well just stick with the points that you want to make and never mind all the impotent rage from the other person. Sometimes someone's argument can be made worthless by simply waiting for them to finish and saying something like, "Yes, that's very nice," and then just go on and make your own point.

In fact, in cases where it doesn't really matter and the other person is really annoying, you might as well say, "Look, if you can't even let me finish, if you can't even talk to me in a normal way, we'll have to do this some other time." If someone continues to provoke even if you concede something, they can get fucked.

[Bombay]

The problem is, it's always US having to explain things. How about you asking the questions and making them explain why capitalism is so good? That's how you can control the converation. It's so easy to ask questions but it's much harder to give good answers. You can prepare yourself by finding good (and difficult) questions.

[AnthArmo]

Whenever people do shit like that to me I walk off and when they try and stop me I respond with something along the lines of "Oh I thought you were just talking to yourself at this point and didn't want to interrupt"

Hahaha, that sounds perfect. I think I might start trying that from now on.


Unfortunately, there are plenty of incredibly pushy and dogmatic people, especially among "fellow leftists". :p

Anyway, sometimes it's just not worth it to argue every silly little point. In discussions like that, you might as well just stick with the points that you want to make and never mind all the impotent rage from the other person. Sometimes someone's argument can be made worthless by simply waiting for them to finish and saying something like, "Yes, that's very nice," and then just go on and make your own point.

In fact, in cases where it doesn't really matter and the other person is really annoying, you might as well say, "Look, if you can't even let me finish, if you can't even talk to me in a normal way, we'll have to do this some other time." If someone continues to provoke even if you concede something, they can get fucked.

In retrospect, I probably should have just "dismissed" him like you suggested. The only real "point" I wanted to make was "This has nothing to do with the topic you arrogant prick". Sadly, I couldn't even get a word in to say that.


The problem is, it's always US having to explain things. How about you asking the questions and making them explain why capitalism is so good? That's how you can control the converation. It's so easy to ask questions but it's much harder to give good answers. You can prepare yourself by finding good (and difficult) questions.

I've noticed that myself, its really quite irritating. Often I do try to take an "attacking position", sometimes it is quite fun, asking the questions, and seeing the other person struggle to answer or justify. However, in a lot of cases, any sort of attack is replied with "It doesn't matter, Communism doesn't work so..."

I could be speaking on any topic, abortion, war, government, labour, whatever be it. The result is always one person who replies with a "Communism doesn't work so your point is moot".

For the record, this particular guy's argument was "Human nature means that no possible system can work, so revolution is pointless". The problem isn't that I couldn't reply to that. The problem is that I couldn't get a word in to reply to it, all I could say was "Thats just stupid becau-"

[ChrisK]

Just stand up real slow, with a very pissed off look on your face. Look down upon him and say, "That has nothing to do with what we're talking about," If he hasn't shut up when you've stood up, just shout "HEY!" That'll get him to listen.

[AnthArmo]

Just stand up real slow, with a very pissed off look on your face. Look down upon him and say, "That has nothing to do with what we're talking about," If he hasn't shut up when you've stood up, just shout "HEY!" That'll get him to listen.

I think thats exactly what I'll do the next time he tries to pull this crap on me. Thanks

[ChrisK]

I think thats exactly what I'll do the next time he tries to pull this crap on me. Thanks

No problem. I get the same stuff all the time.

[The Idler]

I'd try a speaking style less akin to Sam Webb and Noam Chomsky and more akin to Norman Finkelstein or George Galloway.

[Luisrah]

Sometimes instead of going agressive or starting to mock your opponent, it is wiser to be calm. While it won't taste as good, you'll seem much better, there is a higher chance that he will listen to you, and you may still irritate him a lot.

I often say something like ''Will you atleast let me explain my point?'' or ''Can I atleast have a word?''. You can go even further as ''Didn't they tech you in school to hear the other persons opinion without interrupting them?''

If none of that works, just use a technique similar to the ''make her sweat first'' that some many say that always works on women. Just look to your opponent and say ''If you are not capable of having a quality debate where there are actually two people exchanging opinions, then I won't be wasting time on you.''
While some will really quit the debate when you say this, a lot of people (at least in my experience) will go ''Ok, so why is [insert your point here] valid?''

Being calm in a debate is much better than going agressive, since going agressive may show the other person your point and they will accept it, but they may be offended or angry at you and subconsciously think what you defend is bad because you are an agressive person.
However, if you are calm and have a ''superior'' look on you, the only thing you have to lose is things staying the same if your opponent is truly an asshole, while there is a greater chance you will win him over.

[AnthArmo]

I'm reviving this thread because this specific douchbag is giving me the shits.

Recently, this guy has been taking every opportunity possible to take any discussion and turning them into a "Communism doesn't work, your point is moot, due to human nature" argument.

Thankfully, I've actually followed some of your advice. Most particularily ChristoferKock's advice. As well as the whole "Put them into the defending position" thing.

Basically, this guy has gotten to the point were we are talking about films and he will manage to circumnavigate it into a "You have to realise how inherently evil humans are! its just the truth!" sort of argument.

I've managed to do what ChristoferKock suggested. Get pissed at him ("This has nothing to do with what we're talking about!"). Thing is, he manages to justify his douchbaggery somehow. Once he did it by replying "But it IS related to what we're talking about, because your no better than the politicians!!"

So I've started asking him probing questions, putting him on the defensive.

Here's the thing. It would appear that the guy is a political nihlist. He believes that "Because of Human Nature, nothing can work". He actually agrees with the standard Revolutionary critique of Capitalism, but his only position is that "No political system can work because of human nature".

As a result, all probing by me leads to him saying something along the lines of "Nothing! I have no answer! everything fails! But your wrong because of human nature!"

So now I have a new question. How the fuck do I get rid of this moron? Anytime I'm having any sort of conversation, this asswipe just comes in and pulls this crap on me. I don't actually want to debate him because he hasn't actually got anything meaningful to say. Fuckwits like him think that they're cool because all they're capable of is blind criticism, rather than any actual thought.

Also, can a mod move this to Mutual Aid? This isn't just me learning, I'm venting fustrations here :blushing:

[Broletariat]

Kick his ass, when he asks why be like "because I'm naturally evil"

On a more serious note just point to various philanthropic organisations who sacrifice life and limb to help people, so much for being "naturally evil"