Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.
Welcome to Anarchy101 Q&A, where you can ask questions and receive answers about anarchism, from anarchists.

Note that the site is in archived, read-only mode. You can browse and read, but posting is disabled.


0 votes
I keeps debating with conservatives and they always give the most shit arguments and the most bullshit "facts". I see it harder to debate with them due to you having top literally debunk there wrong claims.
by (130 points)
is there a question somewhere in there?

debating conservatives is no more frustrating to me than debating liberals. libs almost always think they are smarter, and their self-righteousness wraps perfectly around their ideology. but make no mistake: libs use "alternative facts" as well - they are just much better at making it believable. after all, when one's faith is in "science" while others' is in "god", how could any "rational" person possibly argue?
i have no blanket tips. i might have some suggestions for a particular topic, or for a particular kind of relationship (are these people family members? co-workers? your teachers? your students?), although maybe not even then.

yea, seems to me that with liberals you have to go back even further to explain the disagreement, making the conversations longer and more tangled. (note some of the questions here on things like what's wrong with rights or what about free speech, etc).
Don't try to debate them if their claims are nonsensical to you and they're annoying you. Is there something you're trying to achieve by debating them?
"Is there something you're trying to achieve by debating them?"

i think that is a primal question. i have never seen any purpose for debate other than proving oneself correct, and the opponent(s) incorrect. there are no doubt some situations where that objective might make sense to me, but that would be exceedingly rare. being "right" is not an objective in my life, at least not in any sense beyond my own self-awareness and needs/desires.

none of which is to deny that there are institutions and behaviors that clearly do not seem to work toward meeting the stated objectives (themselves usually opposed to my own) of said institutions and behaviors.

open discussion about disagreements, on the other hand, can often be interesting and useful. unfortunately, most folks hold their ideologies so tight that such discussion quickly degrades into debate. boring.
I'm trying to understand their thought processes so i can approach them better. I've never understood why most of them would continue to support their class enemy.
people define themselves in plenty of ways outside of class.

and plenty of people don't think that the rich are their enemy, regardless of what class they are. lots of people think that the rich are hard working and/or lucky, and want to be that way themselves.

again, it's helpful to have specific cases to talk about, since specifics make such a difference.
Well yeah, debating sometimes seems to me to be more one of those things of trying to convince/prove to oneself of whatever they're debating is true or better and if they "win" the debate then it must be true and/or superior. Kinda like the people that lie a lot and feel if they repeat the same lie over and over then it will magically become true. I'm not sure if that's makes sense to others on here. I'm not much into debating because I don't really feel I need to prove my pov to others or reinforce it to myself or that my pov is better than theirs.

@badman, the people you're debating may have entirely different ideas on class and what is or isn't a class enemy. While you may think who they support is a class enemy, they probably don't or not know what you mean by that. You say approach them better, but I'm not sure what for. I'm just going to assume to get them to see your pov better, or hoping what you say to them will change their outlook on their reality? As dot asked, it would be great if you gave an example or specifics of what you mean and/or who you are debating (i.e. frends, family, co-workers, random people).
Commenting, because I am not sure the exact question being asked.

Whether I am talking to liberals or conservatives, my method of debate depends a lot on what we are specifically talking about AND (all caps b/c this is important) my relationship to that person.

I can have a very different conversation with my relatively conservative dad than I can with the liberal I see socially sometimes. My mom (a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat) I avoid talking politics with because it is an impasse, and I had a really open discussion with some gun toting bikers about anarchy and my desire for the total destruction of our social world.

Also, this isn't about debate. I don't debate these people, which implies one side will win an argument. I am talking about conversations. If you come at a conversation with the assumption it will be a debate, you are pretty well guaranteed to lose. See for example the vegan who posted a critical comment on Chelsea Manning's instagram pic of a slice of post-prison pepperoni pizza.

Please log in or register to answer this question.