How do you talk to people like this?

[markpkessinger]

Okay, so I spent New Years Eve and Day with some family members. For the most part, it was a pleasant visit, with the exception of the point on New Years Eve, after we had all had plenty to drink, when the discussion turned to various political matters.

Let's see, it started with the horrors of the "War on Christmas," how terrible it was that Relative A was no longer "allowed" to say "Merry Christmas" or make reference to a "Christmas Tree." I pointed out to Relative A that nobody has outlawed the greeting, "Merry Christmas" or references to "Christmas Trees"; it's just that many government institutions have now begun doing something many businesses have been doing for 40 years: opting for a more culturally sensitive greeting such as "Happy Holidays" so as not to offend their non-Christian customers/constituents. I tried to turn the question around. I asked Relative A: "Is it really asking so much, it is really such an imposition, to ask Christians, who alone among the nation's religions enjoy, by virtue of their overwhelming cultural dominance, having one of their religious holidays designated a national holiday?" I pointed out that FOX News trots out this tired old saw every year and tries to make a big deal of it. Relative A didn't get what I was saying, pointing out that the local public school had insisted that its decorative tree was a "holiday tree." I responded that, yes, as a government institution serving all the nation's religions, it was fully appropriate for the school to ask its students and teachers to observe such a protocol. That doesn't mean the phrase "Christmas Tree" or "Merry Christmas" has been outlawed in any respect whatsoever. Relative A, however, insisted that the right of Christians to obnoxiously display their cultural dominance was underwritten by the fact that "Christmas is a national holiday." Relative A then went on to proclaim that this country was "founded on Christian principles" (a particularly ironic argument coming from someone who hasn't seen the inside of a Church in 40 years!). I pointed out to her that the pilgrims did not set out to found a country, but rather to found a colony where they would be as free to persecute other faiths as Anglicans had been free to persecute them in England. I pointed out that 150 odd years later, when the country was actually founded, the founders had witnessed many of the problems that come from an established Church, and sought, instead, to found a secular state. And back and forth it went.

Relative A's spouse, Relative B, then launched into the evils of health care reform, claiming that the new law was nothing more than a giveaway to private insurance companies. I tried to point out that many on the left agree to a certain extent, and would much preferred to have seen a robust public option or, better yet, a system of universal health care, but that these were given away by a (somewhat naive) President in an attempt to secure some votes from the other side. (I reminded Relative B that when Hillary tried to talk about universal health care in the 90s, the GOP totally derided her as a "socialist." I also mentioned that it wasn't like the GOP was offering anything realistic by way of an alternative.)

Then the conversation turned to France's banning of burqas, and how this country "needed" to do the same. Why? Because Relative A really "resents it whenever (she has) to encounter a Muslim woman whose face (she) cannot see." I pointed out that we either have freedom of religion or we don't.

Finally, Relative B launched into a tirade about how "Global Warming" is a "crock of shit." This from a man who is employed in a highly skilled, science-based technical industry. And back and forth the discussion proceeded, becoming more and more heated until, wisely Relative C jumped in to suggest that we needed a new conversation topic.

Mind you, if I'd not had a few drinks, I probably would have managed to avoid the entire conversation rather than allowing myself to get drawn into it. But I was left with a very disconcerting thought: if one cannot even have a rational discussion with a close family member, if one cannot agree with such family member even on a set of basic, underlying facts pertinent to the discussion at hand, what possible hope do we, as a country, ever have of having any kind of constructive discussion on issues of national importance? Other than avoiding the discussion -- which, while an attractive option, is hardly a solution -- how does one begin to engage in rational conversation with folks, like these relatives, who are so driven by raw emotionalism?

I found it all rather depressing.

[panader0]

1. Way to hold your own, well done.

[valerief]

2. Wow, it's like Fox in 3D. nt

[markpkessinger]

4. Unfortunately, yes.

You got that right!

[Drale]

3. You can't talk to people like that

In the old days they would have ran a person like that out of town on a rail, but I guess we are more civilized today, I'm still not sure if that is a good thing or not.

[hlthe2b]

5. Well, if I'd been there drinking, I'm guessing I would have gone

for the full Monty (so-to-speak) in terms of humiliating them in a sufficiently snarky and subtle way that they wouldn't quite know how to react.... I'd probably spin some yarn about how horrific it was that Brown Shirted Liberal Thugs had come in, with their Obama flags flying, to pull down the Christmas trees and spray paint through any religious or Christmas-referent signs at the local mall, before throwing the old people dressed in 19th Century caroler's apparel out into the alley and opening the entire mall to the atheists...! And then they went one by one to every Christian church, overturning the pews, pulling the Christ figurine off the cross and throwing the bibles all outside into a massive bonfire. Not satisfied, they then went door to door pulling off the Christmas lights and wreaths off every door, replacing them with Obama-Biden 2008 yard signs. ....


Oh, I could go on all night. :rofl:

Yup, this is why I no longer interact with my RETHUG relatives....;)

[markpkessinger]

6. LOL!

I have a brother-in-law who is very good at using that tactic, but he wasn't there. ;)

[LinkUP]

7. Funny

That when muslims want to build a mosk 2 blocks from gruond zero, republicans say it's too "In your face" Maybe they understand how some other religions feel about christmas trees decorating everywhere they go? racist bigot pigs? or just gullible sheep? Either way, their judgment is compromised.

[aquart]

8. If someone says "founded on Christian principles," ask which ones.

If he says "All of them" ask "What are they?"

Make sure your eyes are very wide and sincere at the time.

It is the amazing how much peace one can obtain with very simple questions.

[markpkessinger]

19. Good point!

Actually, in the course of the conversation, Relative B actually made the statement that, "The Koran teaches them to kill Americans." I pointed out that the Koran was written many centuries before much of the rest of the world even knew about this continent's existence, let alone America as we know it today.

I also pointed out to him that the Christian bible contains some pretty graphic calls to violence as well (e.g., Psalm 137:9 -- "Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rock!") so that really doesn't hold up as an argument.

[Versailles]

9. Sad...

I actually had a relative de-friend me on facebook due to my political status updates and sharing of articles. He refuses to speak with me to this day (about 6 months later). I think this speaks to your underlying point. I have no problems having a political discussion with someone who disagrees with me ideologically and still remain friends with them so long as they follow the basic rules of debate - Don't make stuff up, rely on facts; There is no need for personal attacks (namecalling, etc); Acknowledge good points that you don't have a response for at that time (obviously, develop a logical, factual argument to counter that point the next time!).

[madmom]

34. I have a mother in law who has done the same thing to her own son, me and my children over religion.

She has accused me of turning her son against his religion and of being everything bad she can think of, simply because I don't believe in her god and won't let her bully me. What the others (SO and children, all adults) believe is their business, not mine or hers.

[abelenkpe]

10. I live 3200 miles away

and never visit as history has shown that more than 20 minutes in the presence of my relatives will result in a similar situation. Actually a worse situation as they will manage to call me a socialist brainwashed hippy artist affirmative action college educated liberal pretty much within 10.5 seconds. So you did well! Quite well. :)

[gateley]

11. Wasn't this ersatz Health Care Reform essentially Romney's plan?

[lunatica]

12. You need to learn that some people have made up their minds and

they won't let you confuse them with facts. In a shorter sentence you could just think, "Don't confuse them with facts."

Don't get depressed about it. Just learn to recognize when you're talking to someone who has made up their mind sans facts. Almost everything A and B said wasn't a fact. It was all something you've heard many times as Far Right Republican talking points.

[lunasun]

13. why bother even talking to idiots let them do their schtick and

then when among other liberals laugh at at all the stupid they said the night b4.
It is simply not worth my precious breath or thinking abilities to argue with idiots who do not get it and never will.
I am not trying to change any small minds and in that way keep my sanity.
If there is out right violence or racism spoken I MAY or may not call them on it but even then they always have some justification for the words they spoke but at least they know you are disgusted.
If they seemcapable of violence or revenge then I do not comment coward that I am & I admit to but retaliation to me or my family is a concern and no I dont want my car 'keyed' either
If you can , just stay away but I know sometimes you cant


I imagine there are plenty of righties who hold their tongue too.
You often do not know the company you keep :)
Smilinf Faces and all that stuff sung about by the Temptations...

[hfojvt]

14. people like what?

What is it that you so dislike about these people? That you think makes them inferior to you?

[markpkessinger]

18. I never called them inferior

I just have a hard time understanding how someone who grew up in the same household as I did, with mostly the same influences, can have such a profoundly different worldview. They are family members, and I don't, in any way, dislike them. Frankly, if I didn't care about them, the conversation wouldn't have meant anything to me one way or the other. Project much?

[hfojvt]

25. sure you never called them inferior

What then, is meant by "people like this"? Is that meant to be complimentary or even neutrally descriptive? Further you claim that they are irrational. Unless you are just as irrational, doesn't that make you superior to them? You don't just think they have a different worldview, you think they have a worldview that is wrong, and horribly so. It is somehow intolerable to you for them to believe the wrong things they believe.

It is also kind of interesting that you and I cannot seem to have a discussion about your little anecdote without you finding flaws in me, and then also pointing them out.

That is a good question though. How do you talk to somebody who would rather disparage you than discuss with you?

[markpkessinger]

26. Well, I don't believe all views are equal

I'm sorry, but I don't think that every view is equal. Call me elitist. But when one relative makes a comment to the effect that "the Koran teaches Muslims to kill Americans," I'm sorry, that's grossly inaccurate (especially since he seems to be unaware that the Christian Bible is peppered with its own calls for violence most of us would find abhorrent). It does disturb me that these family members of mine will accept any unsubstantiated, distorted talking point put out by FOX News as if it were Gospel, yet make no effort, of their own accord, to investigate those same talking points.

Some things are knowable. There are real, objective facts out there for those willing to investigate them. So, no, I don't believe we have to give every viewpoint -- no matter how outrageously inaccurate -- the same merit. Call me a snob.

But no, it is not intolerable to me that they believe the things they do. What is difficult, however, is when such beliefs are founded on ideas that are demonstrably false.

[markpkessinger]

28. I don't think I disparaged you . . .

I don't think I disparaged you; I did, however, take umbrage at your suggestion that I hate the relatives I was talking about, or that I view them as inferior. I do not, and not knowing either me or my relationship with these persons, I didn't feel you had a right to impute motives/emotions on me that you cannot possibly know. Hence, I said, "Project much?" You were awfully quick to make those claims about me, yet you seem to be surprised that I reacted as I did. When you did it, it was engaging in discussion; but when I reacted, you call it "finding flaws" with you. Seems like a double standard to me.

And no, it is not "intolerable" to me that these relatives hold the views they hold. Incomprehensible, perhaps, but not intolerable. My family, generally speaking, is one that places a high value on informed, rational discourse. Growing up, we often had spirited political debates at the dinner table, where we might disagree on how to interpret a given set of facts, but generally speaking could find agreement on what were the known facts in a particular discussion. One can have a rational, if heated, discussion concerning, say, conservative economic policies versus liberal economic policies. But a discussion about the "War on Christmas," where one side insists the phrase "Merry Christmas" has been outlawed (without being able to point out any specifics) is not a rational discussion. I don't say that it's not rational because the other party disagrees with me, but because the underlying question is fairly readily answered. Or, to use another example, Sarah Palin's insistence that the health care reform law included "Death Panels" that would determine "when to pull the plug on Grandma." That is NOT a rational, fact-based opinion, no matter how sincerely Ms. Palin or anyone else believes it to be true. And I don't think there is any particular reason to accord that view equal status with the view that accurately reflects the voluntary, end-of-life counseling that was actually proposed. The view that claimed there would be "Death Panels" is either a willful distortion, or it is ignorant and uninformed. But it is not a fact-based analysis by any reasonable standard. I don't view anyone as being either "inferior" or "superior" to me; but believing in the ontological equality of all people does NOT mean according all ideas equal weight.

Ultimately, what distressed me was not that these particular relatives held a different view from my own, but that we couldn't even find common ground as to what the factual parameters of the discussions were. I find the ramifications of that to be very disturbing. What I fear is that for us, as a country, if we really cannot come to some common understanding of what constitutes a factual basis for discussion, then it will increasingly become impossible for us to come to agreement on how to address the problems we confront.

[hfojvt]

36. I asked three questions.

1. People like what?

2. What is it that you so dislike about these people?

3. That you think makes them inferior to you?

The first question was taken from your title "How do you talk to people like this?" I asked for a definition of "this" since it was not clear from the anecdote what made them "people like this". Further, since they were "people like this" and "I found it all rather depressing" it seemed to me that there was something that made you dislike "people like this". Further, you seemed to imply that they were inferior because you "cannot even have a rational discussion with" them and because they are "driven by raw emotionalism".

Now, it is true that those question do imply certain things. They are loaded, perhaps like most questions, but a loaded question can always be answered by denial as well. You could have refudiated what I said without attacking me, but you chose to attack instead.

You are saying that I attacked first though. Which I am not denying, but I think I had a factual basis for doing so. First, because you seemed to put those people into another tribe. Instead of being just regular folks like you and me and the rest of DU, they became "people like this". Or, as I would call it - they became Sharks, the rival gang to the Jets.

I took that from what you wrote. I would note that I am not the only one. Since Reply #3 suggested running your relatives out of town on a rail and reply #5 suggested replying "in terms of humiliating them in a sufficiently snarky and subtle way that they wouldn't quite know how to react." So even though you react with umbrage to my claim that you dislike them, you laugh at the idea of humiliating them.

So you might see that people can have a hard time finding common ground when the ground is a mere 400 word anecdote, much less when it is 400 years of American history.

You also seem to contradict yourself in your arguments. First, you say that Merry Christmas has not been outlawed, but then you also say "it was fully appropriate for the school to ask its students and teachers to observe such a protocol". So which is it? Has the phrase "Merry Christmas" NOT been outlawed, or is it fully appropriate for the school to ask its students to not say "merry christmas" or to call that decorated Tannenbaum a "Christmas tree"?

I think common ground can be found if people are looking for common ground. Often, however, they are looking to rumble instead.

[lumberjack_jeff]

30. "people like this" = "misinformed and proud of it"

Being wrong is inferior to being right.

[hfojvt]

32. is being truthful superior to being disingenuous?

Because you seem to be agreeing with my side of the argument, at least the secondary argument.

But then the question is about people. I might ask that the person who has never been misinformed cast the first stone. Generally when I see somebody who I think is misinformed, I try to inform them, I try not to get up on a high horse and look down at them like they are some kind of sub-human. That instead of being ordinary humans, who are quite often wrong and lazy and misinformed that they are of a different type - they are "people like this".

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/37

[lumberjack_jeff]

33. Right and wrong aren't equivalent.

I do look down on people who are both too lazy to educate themselves, and so belligerent that they stick their fingers in their ears when someone tries to do the educating.

The OP was a great case study. They jump from demonstrably false talking point to patently silly talking point as if it is a good argument for validating the previous one.

To clarify, I don't look down on people who are wrong. But I don't respect people who look down on me for being right, either.

[hfojvt]

37. when did I say that right and wrong were equivalent?

Do you think we are really trying to educate people in this thread, or are we trying to hate them? I might note that reply #3 suggests running them out of town and reply #5 suggests humiliating them. We give up on trying to educate the morans pretty quickly.

That was normal where "we grew up and went to school" as "there were certain teachers who would hurt the children anyway they could by pouring their derision upon anything we did .." but I don't think its proper education.

Which is the demonstrably false talking point and which the patently silly one?

[LuvNewcastle]

15. I don't know if everyone else's family gatherings

have always been like that, but mine haven't. I don't remember politics being such a hot topic at Christms or Easter or whatever. Sure, there were always one or two know-it-alls who wanted to show off their big brains and make others feel small, but I don't remember any brawls about politics when I was a kid, or even 15 or 20 years ago. Holidays are stressful times for everyone and no one should dread being with their families. Maybe we should all set ground rules about subjects to talk about -- like no politics or religion. Our families are more important than Christmas trees or turkeys. I think it would be a worthwhile effort to bring some laughter back into our family celebrations.

[HEyHEY]

16. I've never, ever, ever, ever been told not to say merry christmas

That's a bullshit lie that doesn't happen. If it does, it's rare. And I've worked two government jobs and many private jobs in my time.

[markpkessinger]

21. Precisely.

It's a total myth -- part of the "poor Christians are persecuted in America because they aren't permitted to dictate how everyone else lives" meme.

[Zax2me]

17. Don't engage

If someone will not reason.

[MisterP]

20. note that they're getting their news from FOX,

which is owned by a Muslim Arab Prince and hosts man-children who endorse Jew-baiters

and B sounds like she's getting her hands on some facts somehow: investigate further

[AC_Mem]

22. I understand so well

My dear mother who I am helping save money by working with her government run new health care law and her medicare, sounds just like your relatives! I don't want to fight with her but when she makes remarks that I know come straight from Faux Entertainment Corporation, I can not for the life of me stand by and not state the truth. It is very upsetting to me because I know she is intelligent - hell, she gave birth to me :) , but her mind is so contorted by daily lies that she just will not compute the truth even when I provide undeniable facts.

You are right, it is depressing.

And today is depressing - we cannot un-know what we know and watching the Disaster of The House and his Phallic Gavel has almost literally made me sick today.

You are not alone my friend,
Annette

[jtuck004]

23. You did fine. Unless your intent was to enlighten them, in which case

you would be setting yourself an impossible goal. Their minds are not open.

So you did fine.

Happy Another Year!

[Mojeoux]

24. Way back when I first started Bartending, I was warned not

to get into any conversations with customers about religion or politics.
But one day I felt I had to add my opinion that invading Nicaragua was a bad idea, "another Viet Nam."
One guy turned his whiskey soaked eyes on me and furiously said, " I went to Viet Nam, and do you know why?" He repeated the last question vigorously. I nodded for him to go on and he said, in total earnestness, "Because they bombed Pearl Harbor! Thats why!" I realized there was nothing I could reply. History, logic, meaningless. It's way worse now-a-days.
I'm so glad we have comedy. Sorry about Relatives A. and B. and I wonder if Relative C. ever worked in a bar.

[mwb970]

27. Did you actually think that you would change right-wing minds?

You confronted them with facts and reasoned analysis, neither of which has the slightest effect on conservatives. They are simply unable to change whatever it is they have where the rest of us have minds, so any conversation like the one you had is a totally pointless waste of time.

You will never reach these people. Never. They are lost.

[pipi_k]

29. Maybe it's the booze effect....

In all the years I've been getting together with my family and my in-laws and various friends, not once has the discussion turned to politics or religion.

Especially not on what is supposed to be a happy occasion.

Or maybe the people I hang with are too polite to ruin the day for themselves and others by bringing up contentious subjects.

Well, except for one particular couple, quite religious and conservative, who used to do it all the time, but not so much anymore. Why? Because Mr P and I refuse to get sucked in. There is no way in hell individuals like this are going to change their minds, and it's a huge waste of time to even try. So every time these friends brought up a sensitive subject, we would not discuss it, instead, changing the subject.

It took a few years, but they eventually figured out that their rants are as unlikely to change our minds as our rants would be to change theirs.

It's a standoff nobody's going to win. Why bother engaging in it?

[Shandris]

31. The only way they will learn is to live in their self-delusion paradise for a while.

'Talking' may get to the occasional person; it got through to me. However, the 'talking' wasn't from a left-winger, it was when I took a pragmatic centrist position on abortion and the other right-wingers turned on me like rabid dogs that I began to speak with liberals and truly question my beliefs.

So long as they have us to pin it on, they will never learn and we will continue this slow decay for generations, each time getting worse and worse but never better. In essence, do you want to boil slowly, or let them burn the shit out of themselves one time good enough to let this idiocy die off.

[Robyn66]

35. Funny,

I didnt see you at my father's house!

It seems to be everywhere now! I cant understand the mass stupidity out there and in our own families and friends.

[Cherchez la Femme]

38. The only way to talk to people like that

is to don't talk to them. Not at least about those subject.
They're never going to believe you, or anybody, once their minds have been made up for them.

Are Relative A & Relative B creationists, especially this guy who is employed in a scientific field? I wouldn't even be surprised if he is a flat-earther. :shrug:

[CTyankee]

39. Tell them the only time Christmas was ever banned in this country was by the Puritans,

briefly, in Boston.

[mstinamotorcity]

40. Those are your family members.

Which doesn't make what comes out of their mouth the truth. Usually when I have someone who is talking false shit, I ask them where they got their information from. And I ask them to show me. Yep it helps to have the PC or laptop engaged.

Most of America believes in the smoke and mirror routine of the repugs. They have been indoctrinated into this frame of thinking. They lack real interaction with people of diverse cultural backgrounds. Most people hit the nearest ramp to the freeway and go to work. They usually don't get off the freeway until they get to their place of employment. I say this because without getting to know about other cultures it leaves you void of knowledge about those who do not look like you. They believe if they work with someone of another ethnic background or political stance they are friends. Wrong!!!!!

Your family needs to get out more. It is obvious that they lead a pretty routine life. They turn on the nightly edition of Faux news and there goes sanity. They believe what they hear. Faux is on a repetitive kind of programming. They never leave their latest fear propaganda message until they know people are consuming it like a bowl of French Vanilla ice cream.

If you want to preserve the family bond, the subjects of conversation should not be politics. Have lost a good friend that way. She called my President a Socialist and said he was trying to turn our country into China. And It hurt me to have to end the friendship. No it didn't Fuck that broad there is no way I will be seen with a BIRTHER!!! Her and Faux can lose my number,address,zip code and any other form of contact that we lead to me.

Your family is something you cannot change. And their way of thinking will not change. But I am glad you did!!!!!!