The Left ... Need Some Thoughts ...
-
Can't add much. @No-Quarter gives you the rationale and @Baron-Silas-Greenback gives you the strategy (even though he may not stick to just seed planting!), it's the war that is important not the battle.
Important things to remember is keep your calm, be logical, be fair and don't back down just to keep the peace. I've had a couple family blowouts and some very good friends and family won't speak with me any more, hell I have one cousin who is current making what he thinks are anonymous assault threats at me on his twitter because I'm apparently alt-right ..still working out the best approach to deal with that one.
As for the lefty view well, it's kind of hard to explain. Anika lives off being a victim. By claiming she is oppressed she gets a massive dopamine hit through her virtue signalling and through people who look up to her based on her level of victimhood. A mature adult TV presenter would just ignore a politely worded anti-tattoo letter from an old bloke. A 13 year old school girl with a brain still in development would not. By accepting the cult of social justice ,Anika has removed any responsibility for her life from herself and her actions and regressed back into a teenage girl with severe emotional problems, she's just throwing out 'white and male' as for some really messed up reason it is 100% acceptable to be racist against white people and sexist against men.
I really worry for young lads growing up in this world.
-
I'll have a go at guessing an explanation.
@MajorRage you are correct in your view that Moa's statement was probably different to the intention of the comment that set her off. I say probably different because we don't actually know what the person who made the comment was thinking when they wrote it. Maybe they did have the opinion that she hastily concluded maybe they really were just commenting on her skin scribble looking ugly.
Moa chose to assign a position of her choosing because she thought it was the type of comment she perceives as using an easy target (her tats) to attack her in a way that the same person would not attack Mr Joe Bloggs side part normal looking white man.Over sensitive, yes. Jumping to conclusions, yes. Assigning a position, yes (although she did make her comment as a question asking if that was the writers position).
The attitude of your sister is to also jump to conclusions The perception of oppression where maybe none exists.
I agree that her 'politics' doesn't help as you describe her as the type to perceive issues of oppression quickly. Her 'leftness' looks for injustice based on race/sex/appearance that is different to those she sees as holding the high ground. Her stubbornness then entrenches that position.
Don't conflate this type of reaction with 'leftness' though. It doesn't help (as above) but it isn't confined to those of hard left views.
Exhibit A: Mrs Crucial. I often have to listen to examples of institutional and social sexism that she experiences and sometimes I wonder (but aren't stupid enough to say) how often it is perception rather than fact. She's no leftie, just a female (in a male dominated workplace). A common gripe is simply trying to get served at a bar where what she describes as 'middle aged woman invisibility' takes hold. Taller/bigger/pushier men and younger women always catch the eye of bar staff. (think how often you offer to go get the drinks because you know it will be quicker)
To answer your direct question. Moa's response is nonsensical if you take the comment and response at face value only.
If you take into account her experience and perception of what people really mean then it makes sense (although it may be incorrect).
Also others will support her stance because they too perceive a situation they think is all too common for them.I don't get why it is being assigned as a 'leftist' view though. Surely that is also assigning a position to others to make your argument?
I get that it is a behavioural trait more visible/vocal among those that try to promote an opinion stridently and that you do get plenty of that 'type' among the far left. You also get plenty of that 'type' among the far right, just that the subject matter is different. It becomes 'our views are oppressed by the left elements of power' rather than the other way around.
-
Thanks - excellent response. Got some thoughts / questions for you.
@crucial said in The Left ... Need Some Thoughts ...:
I'll have a go at guessing an explanation.
@MajorRage you are correct in your view that Moa's statement was probably different to the intention of the comment that set her off. I say probably different because we don't actually know what the person who made the comment was thinking when they wrote it. Maybe they did have the opinion that she hastily concluded maybe they really were just commenting on her skin scribble looking ugly.
Surely when attacking people on live TV, you can only attack the facts though right?
Moa chose to assign a position of her choosing because she thought it was the type of comment she perceives as using an easy target (her tats) to attack her in a way that the same person would not attack Mr Joe Bloggs side part normal looking white man.
But that argument is a false position. As I've read far far more negative press about Wells, than I have about Moa. Maybe thats my selective reading, but the overall slant of NZ media seems to be pro Moa, debate around Wells. So who is really the easy target?
Over sensitive, yes. Jumping to conclusions, yes. Assigning a position, yes (although she did make her comment as a question asking if that was the writers position).
The attitude of your sister is to also jump to conclusions The perception of oppression where maybe none exists.
That sounds pretty accurate to me.
I agree that her 'politics' doesn't help as you describe her as the type to perceive issues of oppression quickly. Her 'leftness' looks for injustice based on race/sex/appearance that is different to those she sees as holding the high ground. Her stubbornness then entrenches that position.
It's her chosen career, so I don't blame her for having her views, not at all. I criticise her for not debating her views with me, just stating that "I'm wrong and I'll never understand" is not an argument for me- hence the thread!
Don't conflate this type of reaction with 'leftness' though. It doesn't help (as above) but it isn't confined to those of hard left views.
Agreed. More than enough evidence across the politics forum !
Exhibit A: Mrs Crucial. I often have to listen to examples of institutional and social sexism that she experiences and sometimes I wonder (but aren't stupid enough to say) how often it is perception rather than fact. She's no leftie, just a female (in a male dominated workplace). A common gripe is simply trying to get served at a bar where what she describes as 'middle aged woman invisibility' takes hold. Taller/bigger/pushier men and younger women always catch the eye of bar staff. (think how often you offer to go get the drinks because you know it will be quicker)
Cannot relate. I have the worst bar presence in the world. I bet you anything you want Mrs Crucial gets served before me.
To answer your direct question. Moa's response is nonsensical if you take the comment and response at face value only.
If you take into account her experience and perception of what people really mean then it makes sense (although it may be incorrect).
Also others will support her stance because they too perceive a situation they think is all too common for them.Yep, got it ... but not sure how that makes me wrong though.
I don't get why it is being assigned as a 'leftist' view though. Surely that is also assigning a position to others to make your argument?
My sister will agree she's a strong lefty, so that's not up for debate. The assigning of the false position is just my view after years of this sort of debate.
I get that it is a behavioural trait more visible/vocal among those that try to promote an opinion stridently and that you do get plenty of that 'type' among the far left. You also get plenty of that 'type' among the far right, just that the subject matter is different. It becomes 'our views are oppressed by the left elements of power' rather than the other way around.
Yes, agreed. Although I find the right far more logical to debate with - again, the politics forum is full of examples of this.
-
@MajorRage did you perceive from my post that I thought you were in the wrong?
-
@crucial said in The Left ... Need Some Thoughts ...:
@MajorRage did you perceive from my post that I thought you were in the wrong?
No, not at all ... Thought some worthy points worth a chat about tho!
-
@majorrage what does your sister do for a living? Is she surrounded all day by people who would be offended by your politics? Did she qualify in an area dominated by people who believe in progressivism (teaching being the obvious example)?
-
My 2c is that people occupying those fringe positions (even if they consider them moderately left/right) are going into instant battle mode as soon as a differing opinion, or even a genuine question, arises.
For the former you might argue they are taking a position of extreme topic fatigue and channeling their frustration about all their previous 'discussions' about X, Y, Z topics. So they fire up immediately, and that's not a positive thing for a genuine conversation, or being open to new or different ideas, let alone even thinking about altering their position. That's why that 'why bother, I can't even talk to you about this...' response seems to come up. Personally that is infuriating as they are further isolating themselves, and pretty much saying nothing will ever alter their position.
For the latter point I think people are so wary of trolls or troll like behaviour, that they have lost the ability to take a question at face value. And even if they entertain that it's a legit question it's hard to divorce that from some kind of agenda of wanting to trick someone or argue semantics etc. So they end up in that angry and not listening mindset.
I'm left leaning, and while I struggle sometimes with the leftard vitriol on the fern, there is a lot of it I agree with. While it can be uncomfortable it's good to have your ideas and assumptions challenged. Plus we have some sharp people (in both senses of the word!) contributing so there is a lot to learn and absorb.
I think there has been some good advice so far, but unless you can get your sister to engage in unpacking her ideas and thinking about your questions or points it'll just be the same ongoing noise imo.
-
@crucial said in The Left ... Need Some Thoughts ...:
Don't conflate this type of reaction with 'leftness' though. It doesn't help (as above) but it isn't confined to those of hard left views.
I agree that the far left and the far right are almost indistinguishable from each other. But Moa's position and views in general are absolutely from the radical left - this idea that anyone other than a straight white male faces oppression, and worse still assigning collective guilt to all straight white males regardless of who they are. She goes looking for racism/sexism, and when you do that it is bloody easy to find as you just equate any criticism or negative experience with it.
It's really just racism and sexism of a different flavour to the far right. The biggest problem with the radical left is their ideas are particularly pernicious - social media narcissism has contributed to this nonsense spreading but even more importantly the universities are littered with radical Marxist's whose aim is to indoctrinate as many students as possible through degrees like Gender Studies. We are also seeing it at younger levels now too. It takes a while for some of these students to unlearn what they learnt at University when they get into the real world.
Far right views are by in large very easy to dismantle, which is probably why Nazism has never ever been repeated, but Marxism/Communism still lives on today despite the absolutely disastrous track record it has - whether that be countries like North Korea, or the spread of cultural Marxism in the west, the philosophy just refuses to die.
I think one of the biggest concerns people have about the radical left ideas becoming mainstream is that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. Right now the far-right crowd are using the attack of straight white males as evidence that the entire left wing progressive ideology has failed and that we need to return to an ethnostate, and they have plenty of evidence to refer to this attack in mainstream media. This is not a game any of us should want to play.
-
Both Moa and your sister and bigots. As such they're not alone - it's pretty much the human condition for a whole host of evolutionary and sociological reasons.
Most people once they have decided on a prejudice - because that's what we are discussing - don't /aren't interested in examining a contrary position. Again most people will take such an examination as a criticism and will revert to one of the 3 standard responses - justify, blame or deny.
Their prejudices are reinforced by the again very human trait of myopically only observing what reinforces their prejudices and ignoring anything else and surrounded themselves with fellow travellers all of which reinforces the initial prejudice. Technology has simply amplified this echo chamber.
then their is the effect of perspective. Most people see their position as sane and logical and therefore not extreme. Where you feel you sit on the political spectrum is not necessarily where others will see you because your position is informed by their position. e.g. you may say you are slightly right of centre your sister sees you as far right. Someone on the far right may see you as a lefty. BSG called me out as an obvious Nats hater and Labour apologist. Which is accurate from his perspective but does not reflect my voting pattern for the last three decades. Similarly in US context National are a left wing party
I applaud you for making the effort but I think for all the reasons above you are wasting your energy. Very few people change what they stand for. It is there perception of what a political party stands for that shifts which is why the battle is always for the centre and the relatively slim number of swing voters
-
I’ve had similar conversations with pro disease or alternative health fruitcakes , they usually go nowhere because they are so invested in their stance it’s probably incredibly embarrassing to actually admit to yourself let alone other people that homeopathy is water or putting a jade egg into your vagina is a good idea.
I think that’s why a lot of people who switch teams when they realise what they believe is bullshit do so quite aggressively because no one likes being taken for a fool.
You could try a different tack with Moa , you could point out she was given loads of opportunities by white males to actually further her career but she was the one who trashed it so it’s not fair to say she’s been a victim of oppression.
Or you could say she’s a fat obnoxious overrated lesbian who has no filter due to years of rampant substance abuse and whatever pops into her head comes straight out her mouth so what she says probably shouldn’t be taken as gospel.
Whichever one you’re comfortable with.
-
@dogmeat agree, the default human condition is tribalism and bigotry for evolutionary purposes. It takes conscious effort to actually overcome that, and I think in the west we are way further down that path than anywhere else and any other time in history which is awesome. It's bloody frustrating to see fringe views creep into the mainstream and quickly undo the progress made.
I don't see my wife as a black woman. I just see her as the woman I fell in love with. And I really thought we had an understanding that race doesn't matter, but more and more the fact that we're a mixed couple is becoming our defining feature which is just fucking bullshit.
-
@majorrage said in The Left ... Need Some Thoughts ...:
So ... open forum. Why am I wrong? Why is me saying that Anika Moa saying "am I not white or male enough" is a nonsensical or logical argument for criticism of here tattoos?
I really would like to understand this, not a shit stirring thread.Anyone telling you to argue from facts is ignoring the fundamental issue - if facts worked rather than emotional attachment to an idea, then your sister wouldn't be as antagonistic and illogical as she's currently being.
Even if you could get the discussion to a point where she doesn't feel attacked, it's the same physiological response religious people have. It's immaterial that you point out the leaps of logic and contradictions, her belief is part of her identity and as such, only a gradual process of seeing flaws will help her realise there's a problem with the central premise she adheres to. The same way most people tend to drift away from their religion, there's no epiphany as a result of well meaning interlocutors.
The hardest part is the gripes and grievances have an historical basis, from which however unsteady the foundation, it provides a buttress. And for some, those grievances are lived experiences that still exist.
-
Give her a forum to properly explain her views.
Talking is a way of thinking, and better in many ways than an internal monologue.
Try that tactic of saying back to her what you genuinely think she just explained.
Leave your opinions to one side and be sure she's been able to articulate her opinions. Make it your objective that she should be heard.
You don't want to beat your sister or make her feel stupid. You love her.
The objective is to hear her side and perhaps with her talking and putting her views in order she will see inconsistencies.
Active listening and giving her the floor is way more difficult than we realise.
Let her set out her platform as a starting point.
I used to be like her and it took months of angry denial to come around, and months of calling BSG a fluffybunny (which he is!) before the weight of evidence took over. I always had a "but you don't know or a whatabout..." to retreat into a safe space between my ears.
It'll take a while but being the conversation passenger will be more fruitful than fighting over the wheel.
Be patient and check your tone of voice.
Again your objective is for her discover different viewpoints, not to beat her into submission, figuratively speaking.
Don't forget it's also a great way for you to learn new viewpoints and why such viewpoints arise
-
@siam said in The Left ... Need Some Thoughts ...:
Give her a forum to properly explain her views.
Talking is a way of thinking, and better in many ways than an internal monologue.
Try that tactic of saying back to her what you genuinely think she just explained.
Leave your opinions to one side and be sure she's been able to articulate her opinions. Make it your objective that she should be heard.
You don't want to beat your sister or make her feel stupid. You love her.
The objective is to hear her side and perhaps with her talking and putting her views in order she will see inconsistencies.
Active listening and giving her the floor is way more difficult than we realise.
Let her set out her platform as a starting point.
I used to be like her and it took months of angry denial to come around, and months of calling BSG a fluffybunny (which he is!) before the weight of evidence took over. I always had a "but you don't know or a whatabout..." to retreat into a safe space between my ears.
It'll take a while but being the conversation passenger will be more fruitful than fighting over the wheel.
Be patient and check your tone of voice.
Again your objective is for her discover different viewpoints, not to beat her into submission, figuratively speaking.
Don't forget it's also a great way for you to learn new viewpoints and why such viewpoints arise
Err.... You are welcome?
-
@baron-silas-greenback
Yeah thanks, all good. Message delivery might need some work, but all good 😁 -
There is an interesting critique of Ben Shapiro on Quillette which makes almost the same points as yours. Although I wanted to disagree with the thesis, it does seem very true that confronting the emotional ideas that underly people’s interpretation of facts, is sometimes more important than straight up refuting them factually.
-
@gt12 I might look for that. I've read a few things in the last couple of years that caused me to revisit how I discussed topics with people. I used to rely on facts, obliterating their argument, walk them step by step through the logic, confirming it with them at each stage that we agreed and after delivery the coup de grâce I'd smugly sit back and await the acclamation.
Then I'd be stunned to find at the last hurdle, they'd simply ignore everything that had been said previously and go back to their original position. As if the discussion had never taken place. I'd never dealt with why they chose to believe what they believed, just what they believed.
-
@paekakboyz I was using the backhanded complimentary version of fluffybunny 😀
-
Another good wad of replies overnight. Thanks to all.
In a nutshell, she think it's not worth debating me as my position is firmly entrenched. And vice versa. And the only way to move forward is to step back, listen to her and ask questions without offering prejudice and then try and explain things. Well ...
@rancid-schnitzel said in The Left ... Need Some Thoughts ...:
It's tribalism and a knee-jerk instinct to defend one's side no matter what. Can happen on the other side as well. I'm sure there are people who will defend whatever Trump says and then slander the person calling it out as "out of touch" or something. Ultimately if you've invested so much time and energy in your own side and have become convinced of the total righteousness of that position, not even a slide show identifying every single error in minute detail will make any difference to your stance. In other words, you're dealing with fanatics and have to view them as such. Just accept that people like this exist and just move on with your life.
Maybe this wins post of the thread for me ... probably just easier. Accept that I'll never know why I'm wrong and move forwards. Reality is that she will take a position of extreme upset at any argument of her views, and it's simply not worth it.
Apparently the Don Brash incident ended up in a stand up and walk out with tears. It is her holiday here and I don't want to be the one to ruin it.