Sidechat icon
Join communities on Sidechat Download

.gaia.

I’m not debating fascists. Even some liberals. You can’t reasonably debate someone if their basic understanding of reality is highly divergent and rests on completely different principles. It’ll always boil down to that. You can’t overturn their worldview
Imagine going into a conversation with a closed mind. Pretty pathetic.
upvote 19 downvote

🌺
Anonymous 4w

You can always present arguments but at the end of the day you can lead a horse to water but not only will it not drink, it’ll spit at you

upvote 10 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous 4w

The whole point is that it’s not a debate. A conversation has no negatives.

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> .gaia. 4w

You don’t know if it’ll drink unless you try

upvote 2 downvote
🌺
Anonymous replying to -> #1 4w

Right but sometimes it’s simply pointless. I don’t need to understand them completely. If they say a few key things it becomes very easy to understand where they are coming from and the ideas they may likely subscribe to, especially if you are educated in politics and philosophy, especially ontology. And for me, where I come from politically, even engaging with certain ideas legitimizes them. And I don’t want to contribute to that.

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 4w

Yeah, no. I’m not having conversations with people that would want me dead if my skin color was different or I practiced a certain religion or came from a different country. At least a debate is done with the goal of changing other people’s minds. Those “conversations” are how the cancers of nazism and bigotry in general spread

upvote 10 downvote
🌺
Anonymous replying to -> #2 4w

Exactly. Conversation isn’t neutral. When certain ideas are treated as reasonable positions within dialogue, that can normalize them. I’m not obligated to provide space for those ideologies

upvote 5 downvote