this post was submitted on 12 May 2025
1273 points (97.1% liked)

Comic Strips

16501 readers
1997 users here now

Comic Strips is a community for those who love comic stories.

The rules are simple:

Web of links

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Why would you think it's without knowing they got intoxicated by fake news?
That's the point, you think they have wrong ideas, so you push them gently to increase the chance that they will question them by themselves.
If that's a poor way to do it, maybe you have a better way, what is it?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Why would you think it's without knowing they got intoxicated by fake news?

I really can't make heads or tails of this sentence.

That's the point, you think they have wrong ideas, so you push them gently to increase the chance that they will question them by themselves.

I don't disagree with gentle pushing. I'm saying what your idea is not going to push them at all, nor will it be taken as gentle. Honestly, it makes me wonder if you've actually interacted with these sorts.

The best approach that I've found is to beat them to the punch of saying things. Basically, make points before they can say stipid shit, they're very easily manipulated if they haven't already taken a stance in the conversation

Also going into the points they aren't as sure on, proving them wrong, has given me a great basis of getting them to admit they're wrong. It's all in tone of voice. Not being a dick about it.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You said this:

Arguing without the understanding that they have alternatives facts is wrong

I'm asking you why would you think that is not already integrated in my way, since I think it is implied by what I explained.

Honestly, it makes me wonder if you’ve actually interacted with these sorts.

Not the MAGA people since I don't live in the USA, but French conservatives, mostly through the diversity of background that exists in sports activities.

The best approach that I’ve found is to beat them to the punch of saying things. Basically, make points before they can say stipid shit, they’re very easily manipulated if they haven’t already taken a stance in the conversation

I think this could work, but it limits the number of opportunities quite a lot. I see no reason to not try both.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 12 hours ago

I'm asking you why would you think that is not already integrated in my way, since I think it is implied by what I explained.

Your way is assuming they will question the things with your push statements. What I'm saying is they believe they have solid foundation, and their alternative facts account for most pushes. They'll bring up reasons. They'll say "facts"(obviously not real ones, but they have them). They'll feel they're knowledge. Those things cause them to effectively counter soft pushes, in my opinion.

I think this could work, but it limits the number of opportunities quite a lot. I see no reason to not try both.

Fair enough that there's not really a good reason to try both. I feel like a key to it is not being condescending, ehich soft pushes ring as to me.

My method has limited opportunities, but since I primarily utilize it at work, I'm meeting this people frequently

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Soap box <--- We have not been here for about a decade. Very, very, very few people who voted right wing are still capable of being swayed by almost anything you say, and the effort you put into it, likely isn't worth it. More Republicans approve of him now 87% to 92% than they did in his first term.

Ballot box

Jury box <--- We are here.

Ammo box