How do I get better at arguing and talking politics in real life, Sup Forums?

How do I get better at arguing and talking politics in real life, Sup Forums?
I'm such a hothead and get easily mad at leftist, feminists, cuckfaggots, and rapefugee-defenders, of which there are way too many in Sweden.
The thing is that when I get mad, I'm the one who looks stupid and incompetent. How can I keep my cool and not go full Adolf on their asses?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=xdhN4-5a7Bc
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Lurk Moar

Somebody get this hothead outta here!

I guess. Maybe also watch a lot of debates with leftists, so their opinions and manners won't trigger me as much IRL? I dunno. I'm also kind of scared to reveal my power level since I live in a pretty communist area.

Paychologically speaking it is very useful to learn how to control your emotions.
When youre arguing with someone who has an opposite view on something, it makes him happy seeing you getting mad.
Instead, if you present your arguments in a calm and relaxig way, this happiness will turn into anxiety because he can see how contrnt and calm you are about your opinions, which will trigger doubts about his own opinions.

Psychology is actually very interesting and when mastered, you can control anyone who you come to contact with.

Try not being autistic.

Try to be calm and plant seeds.. Never expect they will change their opinion. So just be cool and plant seeds, think slowly and clearly, take a second before yo answer their point and just be aloof cool and calm about it.. over time many or them will see what you see.

First of all you answered your own question, you're mad because you're mad, just don't be mad Sven, and if you're mad because you can't prove them wrong:
Be confident sand stay smug, be confident that you're the victor from the very start, you should be the embodiement of smug pepe, once you show weakness (agression/raising the voice) that's the moment you lost
Bombard them with questions instead of answering their ones non-stop, you can't win a fight by never attacking
Point out their fallacies
Always prepare by thinking about possible questions they might ask you and counter points they might bring up so you can counterattack them
Ideally they're going to be the ones to get angry first, which means you won if you wanted to defeat them, and if you wanted to educate them it would be a sign that they're lemmings and unable to acknowledge legitimate information
If they call you racist, Hitler or some other buzzword ask them if they can prove with arguments that it's always a bad thing, and they can't.
If you end up in a situation where you don't understand what's happening or don't have a counterpoint then tell them to explain it to you or that you would be back after some research. Always point out the fact that you not knowing everything doesn't mean you're wrong and you'll be back to prove them wrong.

Words will achieve nothing.

>opposite view on something, it makes him happy seeing you getting mad
Yes, that is exactly it. I guess practice makes perfect. It probably won't hurt to come up with preconstructed arguments beforehand too.
Good advice cunt, cheers.
>try not being autistic
>coming from a britbong
That's rich, Amir. Put your noise cancelling headphones back on and let the grown ups talk for a bit, okay?

Great post Armenia. You have any advice on books to read on fallacies or any good videos?

Only if they are lemmings, remember yourself before Sup Forums, there might be people just like us waiting to swallow the jew pills
youtube.com/watch?v=xdhN4-5a7Bc

The sticky is MORE than enough

>dubs
WITNESSED
I'll be honest I haven't read it, only skimmed it once. I'll give it a thorough read now.

Arguing in real life is all about pacing. You must know when to attack, withdraw or defend. Arguing with leftists is quite easy given the proper attitude.

Since liberalism/leftism is more of a religion than actual stance, you must know more often than not you will not be able to make your adversary yield. However, you can make him/her look stupid or naive.

Start with questions, neutral and calmly asked. The more they talk the more contradictions they will make as liberalism is self-destructing stance.

Ask them about the rights between sexes, then rights of religion and culture. Ask them how they reconcile attacking tolerant cultures and religions and defend intolerant ones.

Ask them how wealth should be re-distributed and ask them why do they believe they can maintain their lifestyle after it.

Ask them to tell you how bad is to attack a group and challenge them when they inevitably do.


Be calm, do not go on rants, use information dump in moderation and try to counterpoint them with few sentences.

They will inevitably loose their shit and start acting infantile.

Then you should smile.

kek is speaking. i forgot about the sticky,its good

And when they begin the mental breakdown stage always tell them about cognitive dissonance, tell them that their reaction is merely a result of denial to percieve a fact that they thought was a lie for their entire life, and understanding it is just uncomfortable for them, that their reaction is natural and understandable. Give historical examples such as "When the earth was proven not to be flat and Earth was proven not to be the center of the universe the reaction of the population was the same as yours" or more recent stuff like "People thought conspiracy theories were fake, and then Snowden happened, then Wikileaks happened". Play with them and tell uncomfortable phrases like "Did you argue JUST to feel better about proving someone wrong?" and "Some people argue for their egos, but others argue to seek the truth, if you lost the argument you might have won something more valuable, knowledge".
Also, since they're lemmings you might tell them that dozens of millions of people think the same way you do, and the number is constantly growing, and also that people who start believing it never go back. People are social creatures, these claims will give confidence to them "If many people think this way it's more likely to be true" is a common line of thought among them.

Also, agree with them in principle.

Generally they are not actively evil, or self-destructive. Thus you can argue the point you are making was already made by them. For example:

I do agree that colonialism unfairly partitioned the african continent and created artificial borders, that created racial tensions. So you see, mass immigration is wrong, we should provide education programs to those people and leave them to develop on their own back home.

Or

Yes, I do agree people should be treated equally, so you see government help based on ethnic or religious ground is discriminatory. We should reward people on merit in spite of their origin !

That sort of thing. Agree and then show them that what they want is contradictory with their other stances.

Arguing with a leftist is more often than not futile. They won't change their opinion out of sheer hard headedness, and they certainly won't admit their doubts. However, what you can do in a public argument is to convince bystanders.

You can expect constant deflection in any argument. "But what about when Trump does X" is not an appropriate response when arguing against Y or Z. Point that out, tell them they're changing their standards, moving goalposts, trying to rationalize their own failings, whatever. Humiliate them and make them look bad publicly, and those who look on may find themselves siding with you.

>I do agree that colonialism unfairly partitioned the african continent and created artificial borders, that created racial tensions.
>So you see, mass immigration is wrong
>we should provide education programs to those people and leave them to develop on their own back home.
wrong
The correct answer is
>Why is multiculti bad and destructive in africa and tibet, but you encourage the same thing in white countries?

be confident, ask questions request specific examples from your opposition, avoid answering broad questions with overly detailed narratives

>I'm such a hothead
>Swede
o rery? bird

>avoid answering broad questions with overly detailed narratives
This, tell them about occam razor, if they have to add a "but" after your every argument it's less and less likely that they're right
HOWEVER it might backfire if you want to go deep on the jews
>you see the jewish elites are bad people
>BUT all of these alt-right people that are against these people are bad as well because the jews payed them so they can be a controlled opposition