The irony is palpable when your entire account seems to be based around creating low quality memes about the right.
Also letting their hate go unchallenged is never a good look.
You not responding because you don’t actually have any logical arguments lmaoooooo
Get better material, this trolling is lower effort than I’ve ever seen
And how will they get educated if you don’t talk to them.
They are not capable of
This is a terrible position to take. Anyone can be educated.
The thing is, nobody likes being flat-out told they’re wrong, and with the way arguments on the internet go, that’s all that will ever happen.
Most of my friends are heavily conservative, but I’ve learned how to have productive conversations with them about issues, and it’s almost always “This is how it benefits you if it were different.”
It’s difficult sometimes, but it’s worth doing, and it’s important to understand that the guy you’re talking to isn’t the enemy. He’s just another dude.
This is a bit of an unrealistic position, especially if trying to generalise past the boundaries of your friend group. Your friends trust you, so by all means, talk to them and try to educate them. But trying to change a complete stranger’s mind is almost impossible.
And many of the positions the left refuses to “debate” are that certain groups of people should not be able to exist within society. Like, the left isn’t refusing to debate tax policy, it’s always about bigotry.
And let’s just be perfectly blunt. The vast majority of conservatives screaming “groomer” at visibly LGBT+ people aren’t going to have their minds changed. You can’t educate someone who does not want to be educated. And demanding minorities stand in the firing-line and fruitlessly try to educate the people who hate them, sometimes to the point of hate-crimes, forever… You have to question the priorities of such a demand.
Sometimes caring for minorities means giving up on convincing hateful people.
Every political opinion has a reasoning and differences in political opinions are usually based on differences in the morals or ideals of people. So why do you have to hate or discredit the opinions that dont match yours?
Refusing to debate a topic (aka refusing to hear the other side’s arguments) just leads no narrower-minded people. You cant have a reasonable opinion if you have only heard one side’s (your own) arguments.
Every political opinion has a reasoning and differences in political opinions are usually based on differences in the morals or ideals of people.
That is very vague. Because sometimes those “differences in the morals or ideals of people” are that certain demographics of people are inferior, dangerous, or otherwise shouldn’t exist in society. That isn’t something we should pretend is reasonable.
It’s also not true that every political opinion has strong reasoning behind it. Some people just do not live in the same reality that we do.
Refusing to debate a topic (aka refusing to hear the other side’s arguments) just leads no narrower-minded people. You cant have a reasonable opinion if you have only heard one side’s (your own) arguments.
But we HAVE heard them. We have heard them for decades. We have heard them over and over and over again until our ancestors had to fight multiple wars against them.
We have heard the racism and the sexism and the homophobia and the transphobia and every other little bigotry. Stop pretending we haven’t heard them out. We have.
And after decades of listening and trying to have these conversations people eventually say “enough”. That’s not being narrow-minded. It’s the opposite.
The more room you make for bigotry, the less room you make for people affected by that bigotry. And if one wants to hear diverse views, then one should listen to diverse people. Bigotry leads to echo chambers.
One of the biggest problems left/liberal leaning people have when debating is concerned, is they’re often convinced they, and their viewpoints, are superior and this should be obvious to everyone.
As a result, they’re often completely unable to make a case for their beliefs when challenged. They never thought they would need to.
Being able to actually make a case for your beliefs requires actually understanding them, and knowing the downsides ahead of time.
Some “challenges” are completely without merit though. Conservatives like to “challenge” the human rights of women and minoritised groups. The rights of people to exist within society and pursue happiness are, to progressives, axiomatically true. These challenges aren’t something to be argued, they are something to be rejected as abominable.
If conservatives want to challenge tax policies or foreign relations or other such issues, sure! That’s a discussion we can and should have. But that’s not the same as challenging the ability for certain demographics to exist within society.
Fortunately for me, those are third - rail issues where I live. Even our most conservative of leaders won’t go there.
That is fortunate. Bigotry is sadly very popular in a lot of places at the moment.
Nooo~~ we’ll just get comments that we’re dodging questions when every right winger talking point isn’t addressed
I’m sure it feels pointless are times but we can’t be the first ones to withdraw from civil political discourse
you’ve had civil political discourse with right wingists? (wingests? trumpsters?)
Actually yes, I have had civil discussions with hard-lefts and with nationalistic right-wingers. I dont live in the US, no, how did you guess?
deleted by creator
What civil political discourse?
