The debate over violence in the left gets pretty ridiculous sometimes, and has been the cause of way too many hurt feelings and splits. It may seem like a fruitless debate, because there will not be consensus on the issue in the foreseeable future, but I think it is still important to have. It can be a lesson in how to treat people who disagree with us. If open to the lesson, one can learn a great deal about how to approach people and try to change their minds. Analyzing their world-view and beliefs, one can practice adapting arguments to fit the target. The real challenge in these discussions is not proving the other party wrong, but disarming them and planting the seed of one's idea.
Too many egotistical lefties just want to prove the other side wrong. It is understandable, it is a nice ego boost to "win" an enraged argument. But it is not likely to get the opposing party to change their mind. It is more likely to get them to dig in their heels and refuse to concede. It becomes a contest, and that is just counter-productive. Playing verbal jujitsu is necessary to escape this trap. Do not frame the discussion as a contest of who is right and who is wrong, switch the frame to something that is non-competitive, whatever form of that which is appropriate for the discussion.
This is particularly hard to do since the American way of speaking, especially the male and academic ways of discussion are often framed as contests. It has even been hard for me to come up with an example of a different way to frame a discussion. In fact, I would deem this a great oppression, in a most Orwellian sense, in that our very manner of speaking has been corrupted to such an extent as to limit our capacity to imagine alternatives.
I wish the proponents of non-violence would take this tack on their discussions. It is far more compatible with the style of non-violence than that of violence, plus I am definitively on the side of non-violence and would like to see the idea win more hearts and minds.
No comments:
Post a Comment