Discussing Politics, Opinions, Views, etc.

Post Reply New Topic

I find myself talking about these things a lot. It's not that I like an arguement or look for one, I am just really curious as to what others' views are and having a discussion with them. I should say that I have strong opinions, but I'm very open-minded and curious. I think that people who know me well know these things, though I often wonder about those who don't know me well. Is bringing up subjects of this nature when talking to others (obviously not all the time) who don't know me well something I should avoid?

I should maybe say here that I have pretty unusual political/economic views (Voluntaryism/Austro-Libertarianism) and I'm quite well-read on the subject and the news. I feel like I should also just make a point to say that I'm always very polite and calm when discussing these things - so it's not like I explode into fiery argumentation.

I am the same way and it has gotten me into trouble with some people, but there are those who don't mind or might appreciate it.

It is intensely frustrating when forced to sit around people who are discussing humdrum la la things and a political/social issues topic comes up, start getting excited that I can finally talk about something, but at the slightest hint of a disagreement in the air, everyone else takes that as a cue to shut down the conversation and change the subject back to happy la la la small talk gossip. Disagreement is the fun part.

I enjoy the occasional debate, and the oppertunity to correct misinformation.

That said, I find the people who want to have honest debate are fewer and fewer. "Debates" seem to devolve quickly into childish name calling, especially when a person who is argueing point A is hit with a strong counter response.

It's quite depressing.

I've also noticed more and more people are entrenched. No matter how many facts and arguements you give, they refuse to accept them. After about 3 rounds, they will start with the name calling.

Dad just walks out on me on this one, trys to avoid the topic with his frends by cutting in on my private discussions with others, even publicly worning/saying I will get out of controal if it starts, I don't they just don't share my love of politics, its my subject to talk about. I can have a good healthy sprited debate with meny and all political stripes, mainly I cant stand Hardline cons and extreame sociolists who have their heads in the sand. I'm a centre-ish socialist with meny libertarian like thoughts when it comes to personal property and budgets so most of my ideas tend to go well with meny. Just sad how some fear politics like its a disease.

People don't like talking about politics because it's more than just discussion to them (for the most part). It's an attack on their beliefs, which they hold very dear to them, so they perceive it as personal. When they stop at the slightest hint of disagreement, it's because they know that neither of them will be able to carry out the conversation maturely, so they are trying to avoid tension. For most humans, arguing, debating, etc. isn't about knowledge at all. It's about being perceived as the most informed and whatnot and it's about social cohesion. Threatening the order is bound to bring something they aren't prepared for.

gail, you raise an important point.

OP, I was going to simply point out that most people are f*****g idiots, and that trying to discuss heavily researched political views with them is like trying to discuss molecular biology with a ten-year-old.

But as gail points out, it goes beyond that. Because not only are these people thoroughly uneducated on the topic of politics, but they're also so stupid that despite their obvious ignorance they still hold close beliefs on the subject.

So it's more like discussing molecular biology with a ten-year-old who is passionately convinced that he hates restriction enzymes, even though he admits he has no idea what the f**k any of those words mean.

Think of it this way:



That's what you're up against when you walk up to an average person and try to intelligently discuss politics or most other subjects.

So what you should really be doing is gently feeling that person out to figure out whether or not they're a f*****g idiot. And remember, they probably are.

If they aren't a f*****g idiot, or to help you figure out whether they are, make it clear that you've been researching and studying your positions but you're not really sure about them; that you're open to the possibility that you are wrong.

That distinguishes you from the restriction-enzyme-hating-ten-year-old mentality which substitutes passion for wisdom.

I use that approach a lot and I find it helps disarm people. It makes it clear that you're interested in exploring their beliefs rather than dismissing them. It offers a challenge that they can rise to.

ETA: If your interest IS in conversion, then remember that you've, by default, dismissed the potential validity of the beliefs of the person you're talking to. Which is really f*****g stupid considering that you don't know what those beliefs are, or why that person holds them. In fact, they may not even understand the beliefs very well, but that doesn't mean the beliefs are wrong. So even if someone defends their position horribly, that doesn't mean you can dismiss the position. Maybe we SHOULD hate restriction enzymes.

I am very much a centrist (at least in the sense that I have varying levels of liberalism/conservatism based on the topic). I would say I'm socially liberal despite believing in only two genders and economically conservative. My views are always moderate and impartial (mostly) when considering political party. I debate a lot, and I am quite proficient. I believe my autism allows less emotional red tape, so I stay calm when talking about sensitive topics like abortion (I had to walk away from a debate once after a peer started getting in my face and shouting at me). I'm curious who else might share my views.

More thread resurrection. Politics and religion have long been considered "third rails" of conversation in "polite society", at least in the States (there's at least one more, maybe it's money). What I'm gonna say that follows is contradictory b/c my SI (politics) and how I approach it is different from what NT codes of conduct recommend, although on the other hand, these social rules seem to be loosening/changing among Millennials and Gen Zers in particular.

Just speaking for this society, you have to be careful when discussing politics, especially w/people you don't know, don't know well or whom you do know but who either object to talking about it period for whatever reasons or who hold views more or less opposite/hostile to yours. In the latter two cases, if you care at all about keeping the respect or interest of those sorts of people, then discussing politics is probably best avoided as much as possible. Even in the former two cases, it's traditionally usually been at best challenging to do w/most of these types of people. On the other hand, many NT's have long broken this rule quite frequently in ways that I at least don't understand, which could be due to a whole range of factors.

The fact that those of you who can do so calmly, however, will obviously help your case in doing so w/alot of people. That's always been a challenge for me, but I'm gradually improving about it most of the time. And it isn't like you can't be "emotional" about how you do it, if you can keep those emotions under control and if you can gauge your audience's tolerance/interest as being and staying engaged w/you, as opposed to being annoyed w/you or something. Certainly showing you're tolerant and open-minded and genuinely interested in learning from whoever you're talking to as well also usually helps.

In terms of debating and/or trying to "convert" someone to your viewpoint/perspective or in the greater accuracy of your argument/view, I would even go so far as to say that's what debates or arguments (or even many disagreements) are about: trying to either prove the superiority of your argument and/or to convince your interlocutor(s) and perhaps anyone else following your conversation. This is particularly true for political discussions. That's what political parties, movements and such (or obviously religious groups) do all the time, it's part of their DNA and modus operandi to do so. Alot of this again comes down to style and reading your audience and/or your interlocutor/opponent. It isn't necessarily a bad thing, it's just about how you do it.

I would finally repeat that this "third rail" rule about discussing politics is rapidly changing for younger people (those under 40) due to social media, the crappy social, work and other societal conditions they've been dealt by my (Gen X) and earlier generations. Politics is becoming kind've an unavoidable part of reality that most people particularly Millennials and Gen Zers have to deal with and want to, so the old rules against talking about it are fading. And that's even impacting older generations as well, as US society is kind've polarizing. Although it's not a 50-50 split since counting everyone, the US leans progressive now, as all the polls show. Therefore even what used to be "centrist" has moved somewhat left, whether most people are aware of that fact or not.

Anyway, if this is a strong interest for you, maybe the best thing you could do is to either get involved in some kind of neutral political groups that like to discuss politics, or to get involved in one or more groups that take a particular ideological stance on one or more issues or some kind of party or something. I think they've become pretty common in most major cities and metro areas, and obviously schools and universities. Maybe this is the kind of place/group where you can make friends, at least if you want people to discuss politics with.

I live in a very conservative area and am very liberal, so I almost always keep my opinions to myself. Perhaps since most people here have similar conservative opinions, they think it’s perfectly acceptable to talk about them openly. I really dislike confrontation, so I usually just smile and nod my head. Occasionally, I ask them questions to figure out why they feel a certain way about a topic, but I’m tactful about it, so they don’t know that I disagree with them.

I avoid these discussions because they almost always get heated when people have opposing viewpoints. Debates tend to be unproductive anyway because people are just approaching the conversation from a stance of trying to prove the other person wrong instead of actually listening to what he or she has to say. Many people have a theological basis for various political or moral issues, so it’s impossible to engage them in a rational conversation outside of that context.

I’ve found that it’s just best for me to smile and nod my head. My dad and I get into heated debates sometimes although he’s usually the one trying to goad me into whatever it is that he wants to argue about. Usually, he’ll point to something crazy one ultra liberal person did on the news as if that reflects all liberals. He’s trying to suggest that my opinion is stupid, but looking at the situation objectively, I don’t think that’s what he’s accomplishing...