Hello /pol/
Parents are hardcore leftists (as in they believed that communism is a good form of government) and this board keeps pulling me further and further right.
I need some way to present redpilled arguments about BLM, Islam, immigration, cultural incompatibility, and others without seeming overly /pol/ about it (I don't want to get fucking kicked out).
Anyone else here who successfully redpilled hardcore lefties? Most of their arguments include:
>Islam is a religion of peace.
>A majority of Muslims don't believe X.
>Islam is compatible with western values
>You can't prove XYZ about muslims/blacks/all the others.
You get the idea. What do /pol/?
>>80312257
>> Islam is a religion of peace.
>A majority of Muslims don't believe X.
>Islam is compatible with western values
Point out the contrasting behaviour difference between Mohammad and Jesus
>You can't prove XYZ about muslims/blacks/all the others.
Point out that community complacence with bad behavior is what allows it to persist, a good example is the Rotherham rape case, where the paki community actively tried to block investigation
Also point out how large groups of blacks are largely destructive, and how the whole community protests and burns stores when some thug is killed
tell them you want to revert
The best way to argue versus an active adversary (and not someone who is passively listening) is to disassemble their argument by attacking weak points in logic. As soon as you successfully "disarm" them, inject common sense into the gap in their argument. You will not redpill devout liberals in one sitting. They need time to process your ideas.
What does /pol/ think of Based Bill Whittle?
Is he red pilled?
>>80312750
Whoops, forgot pic related, well /pol/ what do you think?
>>80312257
>Islam is a religion of peace
muhammed spread the faith with the sword, he was a literal warlord
>A majority of Muslims don't believe in X.
There are surveys done that show a large majority of muslims believing in barbaric practices such as country wide sharia law, beating wives for various issues, homosexuality being a sin etc.
>Islam is compatible with western values
Islam never went through a stage of enlightenment so its stuck in the medieval ages, hence a different set of ideals at a completely different time still existing in modern society. They have yet to reach or enact any sort of modernity.
I dont know about the last one
I'm just using heresay in my statements because they are all relatively easy to google and find in terms of concrete research.
>>80312257
remember that spoken arguments will sound a lot different and have different nuances than anything written like you'll get here. watch some popular right speakers who can present arguments intelligently like gavin mcinnes, ben shapiro, milo yiannoupolis, steven crowder(those are the most mainstream ones and there are many others) and learn their argument presentation. also when dealing with your parents remember they literally look down on you and your opinions and its toughto get stuff across. presenting things (even opinions) as proven fact can help with particularly unreasonable parents. like if they say not all muslims are bad you can just say that 100% of muslims in a gallup poll said being homosexual is unacceptable (which is true in britain) and stuff like that.
source: libfag mom and incompetent republican dad
I think I can help a bit.
(If you need help with a gun debate, I can help you out with that too my good man)
Islam is a distraction to push the discourse into a civic nationalist box.
Arabs are IQ 85 subhumans. They are hopeless regardless of religion.
Race and genetics is what matters.
>cultural incompatibility
Civic nationalism is a subversive ideology with roots in the enlightenment.
Its purpose is to run western civilization into the ground.
OP goes in oven.
>In the United States, a 2011 survey found that 86% of Muslims say that such tactics are rarely or never justified.
>An additional 7% say suicide bombings are sometimes justified and 1% say they are often justified in these circumstances.
>In a few countries, a quarter or more of Muslims say that these acts of violence are at least sometimes justified,
>including 40% in the Palestinian territories, 39% in Afghanistan, 29% in Egypt and 26% in Bangladesh.
http://www.pewglobal.org/2016/04/27/the-divide-over-islam-and-national-laws-in-the-muslim-world/
>Support for Sharia
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/gsi2-overview-1.png
>Support for suicide bombings
http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/gsi2-overview-13.png
>Views of strictly gollowing the Quran for laws
http://www.pewglobal.org/files/2016/04/Views-on-strictly-following-the-Quran-for-laws-differ-widely-between-countries.png
>>80312257
Islam has a code or rule for ALL of its followers, called taqiyya. A Muslim can use taqiyya to deceive, or lie about Islam, or any acts committed by Muslims. They are encouraged to commit what we would call terrorist acts, or acts of violence like rape, theft and murder, of anyone NOT of the Muslim faith's, and then turn around and lie about it.
"Islam is a religion of peace" is taqiyya. It is a phrase that tries to deceive people into believing what it says at face value. However this is a cover-your-ass policy that's used to shift blame and attention away.
Christianity/Catholicism and Judaism don't have an overt rule like taqiyya. The Talmud does but that's different.
This practice means you cannot and should not trust ANYTHING said or done by Muslims, because it could be taqiyya lies and you would never know.
>>80312257
Stats http://pastebin.com/q8K5WrFi
>>80312257
>Parents are hardcore leftists (as in they believed that communism is a good form of government)
>I need some way to present redpilled arguments about BLM, Islam, immigration, cultural incompatibility, and others without seeming overly /pol/ about it (I don't want to get fucking kicked out).
>(I don't want to get fucking kicked out)
kek'ing at your life right now
why do you need to redpill your parents?
