I'm easily one of the biggest proponents of the essay, but my point in discussing it most of the time is to fight against misanthropic ideas about the people being "sheeple" or whatever that are fundamentally sub-rational, and instead that we simply need to engage on a more empathetic basis, trying to understand why people believe what they do in order to find more constructive ways of engaging with them.

And that sounds like a better discussion that puts it in a better light, but I've never seen it happen.🤷 Matter of fact, I would say the opposite typically happens and the argument instead becomes something closer the hopelessness of reaching labor aristocracy or some shit.

[–] into_highest_invite@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 3 months ago

it's not that you can't reach the labor aristocracy, it's that a lot of them have a visceral reaction to arguments against western propaganda that means they refuse to hear or consider what you have to say. i know i've done it before. the article explains why

[–] purpleworm@hexbear.net 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

And that sounds like a better discussion that puts it in a better light, but I've never seen it happen.🤷 Matter of fact, I would say the opposite typically happens and the argument instead becomes something closer the hopelessness of reaching labor aristocracy or some shit.

The issue is that not having empathy and trying to go about these discussions in an overly "academic" manner is usually pretty worthless outside of niche cases where you've basically just gotten lucky because the other person was in a place to have that kind of discussion. Obviously there are some doomer third worldists on the board, but I've never agreed with them and if you read even 8 - 9 paragraphs into the essay, the author explicitly does not either.

[–] JoeByeThen@hexbear.net 5 points 3 months ago

Heard. I'll try to keep that in mind on my next attempt. Whenever the hell that is. Lol. thanks.