Debating right-wingers

[TheWannabeAnarchist]

In the past, I used to be quiet about my political opinions. I knew it would be nearly impossible for me to convince anyone with their own beliefs that I was right and they were wrong, so I just didn't argur with them.

But eventually, I began to realize that being passive like that can be unhealthy. Being meek and humble while some blowhard spews scum from his mouth will soften you a bit too much, make you timid and afraid of people you disagree with. Additionally, it can make this people think you *agree* with them, which is something I cringe just thinking of. Now, I have a new philosophy:

If somone doesn't bring up politics, don't bring it up to them.

If they do, consider the situation. If it's a small-scale complaint, like, say, implying the President is a Muslim or saying schools are starting a war on Christmas, just grin and don't debate with them.

But if they take it up a notch, like say claiming that all Muslims are savages or saying Christians are being persecuted by commie atheists, I make an effort to hit back now. Especially if they keep repeating themselves or trying to press you into talking to them. If a person makes it clear that they want to talk politics with me, I'll give them my opinion good and hard.

For example, a certain classmate of mine, K---, is a neo-Nazi Holocaust denier and frequent Scumfront patron. (This is a true story.) We were walking out into the parking lot together and he started trying to get me to read Mein Kampf. I told him that Anne Frank was better:laugh:

He persisted and said that Holocaust "revisionists" have some "excellent points." That was it for me. "Holocaust deniers," I said firmly, "are pathetic, outright liars who wish Hitler finished the job."

The way he glared at me was so golden; I was so proud, so exhilarated to have earned this moron's anger. I wouldn't care if he punched me then and there, because a black eye in a fight with a Nazi is a medal of honor for me. I know that's petty and confrontational, but I prefer that to being amiable and complacent. Those tense little moments are good practice for the future, in case K--- or any fascist like him ever starts a truly threatening political movement.

I don't know, I'm beng a bit grandiose, but what do you all think? How much BS do you have to hear before you get involved?

[The Intransigent Faction]

In the past, I used to be quiet about my political opinions. I knew it would be nearly impossible for me to convince anyone with their own beliefs that I was right and they were wrong, so I just didn't argur with them.

But eventually, I began to realize that being passive like that can be unhealthy. Being meek and humble while some blowhard spews scum from his mouth will soften you a bit too much, make you timid and afraid of people you disagree with. Additionally, it can make this people think you *agree* with them, which is something I cringe just thinking of. Now, I have a new philosophy:

If somone doesn't bring up politics, don't bring it up to them.

If they do, consider the situation. If it's a small-scale complaint, like, say, implying the President is a Muslim or saying schools are starting a war on Christmas, just grin and don't debate with them.

But if they take it up a notch, like say claiming that all Muslims are savages or saying Christians are being persecuted by commie atheists, I make an effort to hit back now. Especially if they keep repeating themselves or trying to press you into talking to them. If a person makes it clear that they want to talk politics with me, I'll give them my opinion good and hard.

For example, a certain classmate of mine, K---, is a neo-Nazi Holocaust denier and frequent Scumfront patron. (This is a true story.) We were walking out into the parking lot together and he started trying to get me to read Mein Kampf. I told him that Anne Frank was better:laugh:

He persisted and said that Holocaust "revisionists" have some "excellent points." That was it for me. "Holocaust deniers," I said firmly, "are pathetic, outright liars who wish Hitler finished the job."

The way he glared at me was so golden; I was so proud, so exhilarated to have earned this moron's anger. I wouldn't care if he punched me then and there, because a black eye in a fight with a Nazi is a medal of honor for me. I know that's petty and confrontational, but I prefer that to being amiable and complacent. Those tense little moments are good practice for the future, in case K--- or any fascist like him ever starts a truly threatening political movement.

I don't know, I'm beng a bit grandiose, but what do you all think? How much BS do you have to hear before you get involved?

The line for me is about the same. I've confronted my share of outright fascists and/or crypto-fascists before (at least one of whom has been on StormFront), and I find I can't sit or stand there saying nothing. If anything, it's them and my outspoken confrontations with them who pushed me further left at the start. It can be a good reminder.

People don't react well to preaching...and yet they can unthinkingly echo right-wing sentiments, but trying to take down every one of those at all times in any setting isn't necessarily effective for anything other than exhausting yourself. Calling out an outright fascist is different from responding (or not) to a misinformed but not malicious remark from a friend.

[Red Economist]

I don't know, I'm being a bit grandiose, but what do you all think? How much BS do you have to hear before you get involved?

I'm still of the relatively meek political disposition, but if I come across a situation where someone's reasoning is faulty (from a materialist standpoint) and it has practical consequences, I will usually tell them, especially if someone stands to get hurt by what they're doing.

I haven't come across Holocaust deniers in rl, but you certainly handled it well.... Anne frank is better...revisionists wished Hitler had finished the job...ouch!

That must feel good. :grin:

Don't make yourself a martyr and get beaten up too much though. that's probably the wrong reason to get beaten up.



People don't react well to preaching...and yet they can unthinkingly echo right-wing sentiments, but trying to take down every one of those at all times in any setting isn't necessarily effective for anything other than exhausting yourself. Calling out an outright fascist is different from responding (or not) to a misinformed but not malicious remark from a friend.

This is Spot on. it is really difficult to know where the line is, and if you respond to everything- you'll just wear yourself out. But again, I think it's about making the distinction between ignorance and intent with potentially practical consequences and fascists would fit that category.
I've only met a member of the BNP at Uni as he was on the same course as me. we did talk for a while and shared some economic ideas in common. But, there kind of was an awkward, cold silence when he started talking about 'Jewish bankers' and 'blacks'. That's the limit of my experience with fascists.

[TheWannabeAnarchist]

Definitely. 90% of the time, I still prefer to keep my mouth shut. And it's certainly not a good thing to seek out confkicts without regard for your own safety, because the only person who's going to congratulate you is yourself:laugh: I get where you all are coming from.

[JTC]

I get into a heated "debate" with an anarcho-capitalist I know. I've kind of given up trying to argue because it is such a dogmatic ideology that no matter what you say the magic free-market fixes the problem. So it gets frustrating

[falce e martello]

Considering that adults wouldn't care about my opinions due to my age I always debate with other teens in matter of politics. All the ones I know who have an ideology are fascists - but they're even more ignorant than adult fascists: they don't know anything about fascist economics, they don't know who Evola and D'Annunzio are and so on. They only like fascism because of its racist social politics - but, guess what? They want drug legalization :D
I like arguing with them cause I always win.

[mojo.rhythm]

JTC,

AnCaps are fairly easy to destroy. It doesn't take a lot; you've just got to know the right buttons to push.

For example, I participated in student elections recently, and I debated a classical liberal (not too far off from the AnCap philosophy). I asked him "Do private companies have a right to market heroin to children?" He said "No." I said "Doesn't that violate your non-aggression principle? What gives you the right to coerce a business and tell them what they can and can't advertise? They aren't initiating force, are they?" From then on, he just waffled and refused to answer the question. But I calmly just kept asking him "Do you, or do you not think businesses have the right to market heroin to children?" In the end, he got extremely upset because he knew that I had totally and completely PWNED him in front a of a crowd of strangers.

[Hagalaz]

In the past, I used to be quiet about my political opinions. I knew it would be nearly impossible for me to convince anyone with their own beliefs that I was right and they were wrong, so I just didn't argur with them.

But eventually, I began to realize that being passive like that can be unhealthy. Being meek and humble while some blowhard spews scum from his mouth will soften you a bit too much, make you timid and afraid of people you disagree with. Additionally, it can make this people think you *agree* with them, which is something I cringe just thinking of. Now, I have a new philosophy:

If somone doesn't bring up politics, don't bring it up to them.

If they do, consider the situation. If it's a small-scale complaint, like, say, implying the President is a Muslim or saying schools are starting a war on Christmas, just grin and don't debate with them.

But if they take it up a notch, like say claiming that all Muslims are savages or saying Christians are being persecuted by commie atheists, I make an effort to hit back now. Especially if they keep repeating themselves or trying to press you into talking to them. If a person makes it clear that they want to talk politics with me, I'll give them my opinion good and hard.

For example, a certain classmate of mine, K---, is a neo-Nazi Holocaust denier and frequent Scumfront patron. (This is a true story.) We were walking out into the parking lot together and he started trying to get me to read Mein Kampf. I told him that Anne Frank was better:laugh:

He persisted and said that Holocaust "revisionists" have some "excellent points." That was it for me. "Holocaust deniers," I said firmly, "are pathetic, outright liars who wish Hitler finished the job."

The way he glared at me was so golden; I was so proud, so exhilarated to have earned this moron's anger. I wouldn't care if he punched me then and there, because a black eye in a fight with a Nazi is a medal of honor for me. I know that's petty and confrontational, but I prefer that to being amiable and complacent. Those tense little moments are good practice for the future, in case K--- or any fascist like him ever starts a truly threatening political movement.

I don't know, I'm beng a bit grandiose, but what do you all think? How much BS do you have to hear before you get involved?

So you didn't research the other side?
I have,and that enables me to seriously debate the fascists.
But you just glory in being "golden"?
:rolleyes:

[Chomskyan]

But if they take it up a notch, like say claiming that all Muslims are savages or saying Christians are being persecuted by commie atheists, I make an effort to hit back now. Especially if they keep repeating themselves or trying to press you into talking to them. If a person makes it clear that they want to talk politics with me, I'll give them my opinion good and hard.Considering, a) those people are not Christians,* b) that commies don't have any power in the US, and c) Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Iran, Iraq etc. were mostly peaceful countries before US/Israeli intervention, I'd say that's a big load.


I don't know, I'm beng a bit grandiose, but what do you all think? How much BS do you have to hear before you get involved? Silence is conformity. I reject conformity. If everyone was passive and submissive, there would be no resistance to violent and dangerous ideologies like this.

So, if it's politics I won't submit. But, this is the US we are talking about. I only know of maybe two people who have views like Obama being a Kenyan Muslim and that Obama is a Socialist and so on. Otherwise, I get along well. And I'm not the insulting type, or at least I try not to be. It's un-Christian after all. I was animated about the whole historical revisionism those CONservatives are trying to push in the schools, the facts that Communists, Socialists, Anarchists began the civil rights movement. The fact that antiwar activism has a consistent history in the United States. The fact that Capitalism caused terrible and atrocious conditions for working people. All of these things they want to erase from history textbooks.

Malcolm X: "Don't be in a hurry to condemn because he doesn't do what you do or think as you think or as fast. There was a time when you didn't know what you know today."

*These people don't know real persecution. Christians in the Middle East are being abducted, raped, tortured, and murdered. ISIS goes place to place and gathers Christian children and beheads them, and mass executes them. That is just Christian persecution. Look at how Shi'ites are treated in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Syria under these Salafis. I've seen firing squads, mosque bombings, mosques being set on fire, graves and Shi'ite holy sites being desecrated. You can look at how Ahmadis are treated also, they are not even considered Muslims according to mainstream Islam. The point is, these people are a disgrace to real religious persecution around the world. Atheists haven't mass abducted and mass slaughtered any Christian children in the US. That's just taking advantage of the freedoms you enjoy in one country to complain about "persecution" and it demonstrates no respect to those people who are really being persecuted.

[Loony Le Fist]

I get into a heated "debate" with an anarcho-capitalist I know. I've kind of given up trying to argue because it is such a dogmatic ideology that no matter what you say the magic free-market fixes the problem. So it gets frustrating

What gets interesting is when you ask them to define and provide the mechanism by which the market magically fixes it all. Then you get all sorts of unfounded assertions and hair-pullingly frustrating rubbish about common sense and human nature. :laugh:

[Chomskyan]

What gets interesting is when you ask them to define and provide the mechanism by which the market magically fixes it all. Then you get all sorts of unfounded assertions and hair-pullingly frustrating rubbish about common sense and human nature. :laugh:

Right-wing ideology in a nutshell (at least in the US...):

1. The Bible is infallible.

2. The Free Market is infallible.

3. The United States is infallible.

[Rosa Partizan]

Is it just my twisted mind or is anybody else always getting "dating right-wingers" from the headline?

[consuming negativity]

It depends on the setting and my mood more than anything. Sometimes I'm in the mood to kick ass and take names, and other times I'm just wore down and can't bring myself to do much more than shake my head. Just try not to beat yourself up either way. Do what you think feels right and you'll be just fine.


Right-wing ideology in a nutshell (at least in the US...):

1. The Bible is infallible.

2. The Free Market is infallible.

3. The United States is infallible.

Eh. Not really. People aren't so stupid that they think everything is perfect; they just don't think things could be much better. When it comes to the religious right, yes, but even they're just good at deluding themselves. The only people who tend to fall into all three of these categories are 18-19 year olds who are smart enough to think for themselves but still too stupid to question whether or not their parents were completely and utterly full of shit.

If you treat people like they're stupid, they can sense it, and they will kick back like a horse. You gotta treat them like they're smart and with respect or else you'll never make any headway. Then you lay on the smack down and leave them standing there thinking "what the fuck did I get myself into".


Is it just my twisted mind or is anybody else always getting "dating right-wingers" from the headline?

I think you've just got other things on your mind. :rolleyes: ;)

[Chomskyan]

It depends on the setting and my mood more than anything. Sometimes I'm in the mood to kick ass and take names, and other times I'm just wore down and can't bring myself to do much more than shake my head. Just try not to beat yourself up either way. Do what you think feels right and you'll be just fine.



Eh. Not really. People aren't so stupid that they think everything is perfect; they just don't think things could be much better. When it comes to the religious right, yes, but even they're just good at deluding themselves. The only people who tend to fall into all three of these categories are 18-19 year olds who are smart enough to think for themselves but still too stupid to question whether or not their parents were completely and utterly full of shit.

If you treat people like they're stupid, they can sense it, and they will kick back like a horse. You gotta treat them like they're smart and with respect or else you'll never make any headway. Then you lay on the smack down and leave them standing there thinking "what the fuck did I get myself into".



I think you've just got other things on your mind. :rolleyes: ;)

Re bolded: Serious, ideological right-wingers hold all that I have stated above as unquestioned dogma. I was one, I know. If we are talking about people who just "identify" more with Conservative beliefs, then I understand. But "true believers" believe in those things.

[consuming negativity]

Re bolded: Serious, ideological right-wingers hold all that I have stated above as unquestioned dogma. I was one, I know. If we are talking about people who just "identify" more with Conservative beliefs, then I understand. But "true believers" believe in those things.

Yeah, exactly. You /were/ one. You weren't stupid - you seem to be to be quite smart - and yet you believed that garbage all the same. I was also once a believer in a bunch of ridiculous nonsense, and yet here I am less than a decade later as a contributing poster to the RevLeft forum. I just don't think it's appropriate to be mean to people.

You wanna know what put me on the path to leftism? We were debating in ninth grade on gay marriage, and I, being the reactionary prick I was, was on the anti-gay marriage side of the debate. Not out of any real beliefs, but because I was like "LOL why would you wanna do that?" It was just childish ignorance. And after class, a friend of mine since 2nd grade came up to me and told me how hurt he was. He was gay, and I had known it, but I didn't even put two and two together. I just hadn't considered the other point of view. And I felt terrible about it. And slowly, but surely, I ended up here. My life is filled with those moments... when I stopped being a capitalist it wasn't because some Marxist "showed me the light", it's because I was thinking "well shit, if all of this is so obviously wrong, why do people still believe in it?" And it opened a rabbit hole that I'm still falling down.

Preachy, I know. And I know that that wasn't even your point. But I agree with your point and wanted an excuse to elaborate on the subject because I'm in a talkative mood. So what do you think? Wanna tell us about your abandonment of the nonsense? I think people like us are way more useful when it comes to these things than those who grew up as leftists, because we understand how the thought process goes and what is necessary to counter it and help people grow.

[Chomskyan]

You wanna know what put me on the path to leftism? We were debating in ninth grade on gay marriage, and I, being the reactionary prick I was, was on the anti-gay marriage side of the debate. Not out of any real beliefs, but because I was like "LOL why would you wanna do that?" It was just childish ignorance. And after class, a friend of mine since 2nd grade came up to me and told me how hurt he was. He was gay, and I had known it, but I didn't even put two and two together. I just hadn't considered the other point of view. And I felt terrible about it. And slowly, but surely, I ended up here. My life is filled with those moments... when I stopped being a capitalist it wasn't because some Marxist "showed me the light", it's because I was thinking "well shit, if all of this is so obviously wrong, why do people still believe in it?" And it opened a rabbit hole that I'm still falling down.


I thought a bit critically, even as a right-winger. I studied languages and cultures for example. However, I didn't begin my shift to the Left until I saw the Arab Spring happen. Since I learned Arabic, and cared deeply for the region, it's people and the religious minorities there, I had a tough time reconciling the "America is infallible" bit with the reality that America created the volatile situation in the Middle East. So, it was during that time that I stopped being a "neocon" reactionary, and started being a deeply antiwar, anti-Imperialist neoliberal (i.e., "Libertarian"). However, when 2012 came along I was deeply disappointed with the fact that Ron Paul didn't win, and Romney didn't win.

So, I started to look elsewhere. The person who opened up my mind to the Left was Noam Chomsky. Thus, the reason for the username. I saw lots of videos on Youtube about US imperialism, both historically and today. I was naive to the fact that, I thought that US interventionism is something new, something Obama is only guilty of. (The right always blames Obama.) I believed in the electoral process, that once Obama was out of office, these evil and disguisting policies would stop. I realized I was wrong when Noam Chomsky read off all of the historical atrocities the US has committed in the Cold War, in the exact same way that it commits them in the Middle East today. I should also note that my worldview in a different arena was changing at the same time, that of religion. I critically examined my own Christian tradition and found it to be lacking, I've been more inclined to the Orthodox Church (the indigenous Church of the Middle East) recently, so I shouldn't downplay the use of criticism in that realm as a possible gateway into my changing political views. I moved to the Left after that, I was exposed to his and many other Left-wing views notably those of Jeremy Scahill, Glenn Greenwald, Chris Hedges, Norman Finkelstein and Cornel West. Although it wasn't until recently (after reading the history of Socialism, the Wobblies, what Socialism actually means) that I became a radical. I would've called myself a "Progressive" a few months ago.

[Chomskyan]

Anyway, I should mention that today a proxy of the Koch Bros. came to my College and started preaching their free market garbage to my class.

I walked out in protest. :)

[Loony Le Fist]

Is it just my twisted mind or is anybody else always getting "dating right-wingers" from the headline?

Been there, done that IRL. It sucks. </end derail>

[Chomskyan]

Right-wing ideology in a nutshell (at least in the US...):

1. The Bible is infallible.

2. The Free Market is infallible.

3. The United States is infallible.

I found a piece on Salon (http://www.salon.com/2011/07/05/lind_three_fundamentalisms/) that I just had to applaud, they nailed it.

[Spatula City]

Debating is almost never a rewarding experience because winning a debate doesn't make you right any more than winning a physical fight does.

If people are going to change their minds, they have to do it on their own. And sometimes fighting back is just going to make them more set in their ways.

[Chomskyan]

Debating is almost never a rewarding experience because winning a debate doesn't make you right any more than winning a physical fight does.

If people are going to change their minds, they have to do it on their own. And sometimes fighting back is just going to make them more set in their ways.

I found that out the hard way a couple days ago.

People who worship capitalism, who ignore the problems around them and listen intently to, and believe every word of what the Bourgeoisie claim cannot be reached unless they themselves have a realization.

[Illegalitarian]

There's a great many of those on the left and especially this very website who have apparently not shaken the very liberal idea that every issue we have with non-leftists can be fixed and boiled down to discourse and notions of "honest dialogue", making every interaction with the right a fruitless exercise in intellectual masturbation.


You have to pick and choose your fights by recognizing who is and isn't going to be completely dishonest or overly defensive in defending their views, and any notion what so ever of someone "reaching out" to hyperreactionary racists, fascists, homophobes etc is a fools errand.

[GaggedNoMore]

You have to pick and choose your fights by recognizing who is and isn't going to be completely dishonest or overly defensive in defending their views, and any notion what so ever of someone "reaching out" to hyperreactionary racists, fascists, homophobes etc is a fools errand.

So true.

It can be a waste of one's time and breath trying get some people to reconsider their views. A wise friend of mine once said "It's like teaching a dog how to sing...not only is it hopeless and futile, all you succeed in doing is annoying the dog."

[The Garbage Disposal Unit]

That said!

Sometimes a well played debated isn't to convince your opponent of anything, but only third parties.

I think this is an important thing to keep in mind, because it means that not only do you have to be right - you also have to be better looking, and have plan for inviting everyone else out for drinks afterword.

Sorry, that was a dumb joke. But y'all get my point, right?