So I watched the TED Talk “How to have better political conversations” by social psychologist Robb Willer. He begins with the divide between the left and right which has increased over the years, as we’ve likely noticed. And the research confirms this intuition. More and more the left and right don’t like each other, e.g. left-wingers don’t want to go on dates with right-wingers and vice versa. So, what kind of movie is this political divide most like? A disaster movie? Or perhaps a war movie? No, it’s more like a zombie apocalypse movie. People move around in packs and don’t think as individuals, but they think in a mob mentality and try to spread their disease. We probably think we’re the survivors in this movie. However, everyone’s probably thinking the same thing, that they’re the good guys and the others are zombies. What can we do to help with the polarization problem? The political divide is fundamentally a moral divide. The right and left have different values for certain things, e.g. the left value equality and fairness more so than the right. So, when we want to speak with the other side we should appeal to what they value most. For example, if a right-winger wanted to persuade a left-winger they should appeal to the left-winger’s moral values, i.e. connect a policy with the opposing ideology’s moral value. Maybe this isn’t actually a zombie apocalypse movie but a buddy cop movie. At first the cops don’t like each other, but later they become buddies and feel better because of it. However, we’re the ones who need to bring us together. And he ends saying we must give one another empathy and respect. Will y'all be willing to have an open dialogue with left-wingers?
Left and Right-o
Other urls found in this thread:
As soon as liberal compromise stops meaning "you get nothing but we only get 90% of what we wanted, we're so generous", sure
See: every firearms law ever
Sure. A lot of us are national socialists so economically, we're already with leftists.
We also love identity politics and seek to advance our group's interests.
It's not like these are different species talking to each other.
>down
>little
>cold
>subract
>pairing the republican with all the negatively-connotated answers
really makes you think
makes
you
think
Maybe we can appeal to guns giving minorities fairness when dealing with possible oppressive circumstances, like if a group of corrupt white police wanted to gang up on a group of African Americans. Something like that.
Id be willing to chit chat and discuss topics with leftists anytime they become willing to stop being absolutely retarded.
At this point listening to them babble is something i do not consider an "open dialogue"
Link it.
What are you even talking about, you brainlet? Nobody is stopping minorities from having guns except Democrats.
Wow, I didn't know cartoons could be art but I was wrong
TLDR
youtube.com
I'm giving an example how you might persuade a left-winger to support having guns.
>TED Talk
Stopped reading here.
It's hard to compromise when the other side's key world view results in me getting replaced in my own homeland
That's what I initially thought, but then I thought about it a little more.
Down refers to the national debt. Little refers to government size. Cold refers to a dispassionate demeanor. Subtract refers to reduction in either debt or government size.
You could say cold is negative, but so is hot.
Break the 24 hour news cycle. It just keeps everyone crazy and up at 3am to watch mccain fuck up your healthcare bill.
People are oversaturated with political information constantly which is all aimed to get an emotional response out of you basically its a 24/7 society wide catfight
>So I watched the TED Talk “
also
>left winger
>morals
Top kek the only morals leftists have are the ones aimed at destroying our society
Jesus christ you're gullible.
>Will y'all be willing to have an open dialogue with left-wingers?
No. The time for that has long, long since passed. The rise of right wing politics is a REACTION to liberal lunacy, not a pre-emptive oppressive force like they are.
This. "Appealing to leftist values," is retarded. I don't have the time or patience to appeal to leftist values, in the way that I don't have the time or patience to tell a petulant child why he can't have candy, or a hysterically insecure woman why she's not the prettiest woman in the world.
Equating emotions to the same value as facts is why the Western world has started heading in such a shit direction, in the first place; we need less of it, not more.
We'll never get along, hence the reason the democratic system is the way it is. We debate like gentlemen, and hopefully, reach a compromise. Now that women have rights, it's all: "They're not allowed to speak!!!! They're L I T E R A L white supremacists!!!! Call the cops!!! RRRRRREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!"
Stupid, cum-addicted whores.
Why contain it?
It's just demographics. More subhumans, dems exert more effort consolidating their votes. Dems alienate whites, Reps have more ground to work with and make a program more in line with their values. You're always shooting for the smallest possible victory in a two-party system, trading ideology for votes and vice versa if you can afford it.
That's why majority is largely pointless. Even 10% shitskins will move both parties left a shitton.
Hardened political sides and gangs are for fools anyway, so sure. But then again I'm not who you're pitching this to.
>If we want to convince people on the opposing side, it's best to appeal to their sensibilities and find common ground
Learn to read you fucking pinko. Its not that hard.