How do you persuade a person - especially SJWs or similar - of your political ideology?
If I have a dispute with one of them, I alway get into trouble. All those thoughts and arguments rush through my mind and I'm not capable to organize and verbalize them in a propper form.
So how do you get good at debating?
You don't. It's like trying to thread a needle with a camel.
So just keep quiet, listen and if asked, just say "yay go gay." Then leave.
You just gotta know your shit. Look for flaws in their arguements like contradicting themselves. They like to talk alot to make it seem smart. You just have to talk more than them in their own game, then they will hide behind their "safe zones".
>>55920401
>So how do you get good at debating?
debating
Well let's have an experiment then. I'm an "SJW." Go ahead, try to turn me into a Nazi. AMA bro.
>>55921608
Migrants r gay
>>55921608
This is good, a devil's avocado for the sake of practice.
If you wanna try in german, here I am. Let's just play this along, it might improve us both.
Don't forget: never get revved up to Wrath of the People level, no matter how close we are to a shitflinging contest. We're trying to create something that works universally here, not on idiots or 4chan.
Don't, just don't. I've lost friends over this.
The best thing to do is just sit it out. Time cures ignorance.
>>55921859
Mein gott! I've never met such a reasonable right-winger! Thinking of the universal and everything! I'll try not to fling shit unless you do first.
/pol/ doesn't have a political ideology, you just repeat infographics to sound edgy
if you think it's national socialism it's not, since it's a primarily economic stance and no one on this entire board knows anything about economics
Speaking from experience, debating with idiots only drags you down to their level and makes you use their trashy terminology. Having to quote the quran is lulzy for arabs cause it means you had to read their book.
Subhumans exist only to be dominated.
>>55921859
>devil's avocado
kek
>>55920401
Appeal to morality. Seriously, these people know nothing about politics and simply want to feel like they are the second coming by letting in more refugees.
A few pieces of rhetoric that work like magic
>The real victims are
>It's our moral obligation to
>We can't ignore
>We must raise awareness
>I can tell you are a good person who wants to make a difference
Have fun!
>>55920401
>especially SJWs
You don't. SJWs can't be convinced that way. You have to have the debate in public, and focus on gettin them to expose the flaws in their own ideologies.
>>55922318
>trashy terminology
>subhuman
lol
>>55920401
You don't, some of them never change their minds and others will only change their minds when faced with the consequences ( i.e. they or someone in their family are raped, mugged, killed, etc. ). They are the kind of people that only respond to action that affects them, not reason. They are unable to comprehend long term effects as they live in the now. That is why they find comfort, regulation, ignorance, safe spaces and hedonism so important over worrying about the future.
>>55922726
Hey there froggie why would one black guy stabbing your friend make all of the black guys bad?
>>55922816
Because it's his right to hold that opinion desu.
>>55923029
He didn't say it was an opinion. He said it was a fact.
>>55920401
>How do you persuade a person - especially SJWs or similar - of your political ideology?
By predicting the future based on my ideology, and having it come true.
I called a Muslim terrorist attack in Europe via the "refugees" months ago. Then it happened. Whoopsie doopsie, now all my libtard friends see me as some kind of Nostradamus and keep asking me what's going to happen next.
>>55920401
You don't change their mind, but you can smash their arguments.
It takes a lot of effort to argue with them because they are so uninformed. But just think about all their common arguments and research stats and other things to counter them with
Step one:Read a lot on a subject(which i'm sure you already know a lot,since you're on /pol/)
Step two:DISPLAY FIRM BELIEF in what you're saying
Step three:call bullshit when you catch them on wrong foot(false statistics,claims,etc..)
Step four:don't TRY TO CONVINCE THEM ON FORCE.Present your claim and have argument about it,if they refuse to change their mind after you presented facts,stop conversation
Step ZERO:ALWAYS BE AGRESSIVE with your argument.What I mean by agressive is,always point out the bad points of possible outcome of the current argument you have.Example:If you're talking about refugees,stick to all the bad things that accepting them brings-division between countrymen,money spent,INTOLERANT Muslim culture,loss of your own national identity,tensions,etc..
>>55923347
>didnt say the word fact once
murrica land of the reading comprehension
>>55920401
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5It1zarINv0&feature=youtu.be&t=1h7m12s
They are demoralized and subverted.
>>55920401
it's usually a multi conversation process that can take weeks. You start with normies claims that even normies can aknowledge. Know that not everyone can be saved. It's a general guideline but it always depend on how receptive a person is.
Step 1 You start by mentionning undisputable facts that even mainstream media aknowledege.
Like how it's weird that theyre 80% young males. How most of them aren't from syria. If the person ask questions/debate answer him but try to stay in the overton window.
When you feel like the person agree with step 1,
Step 2 you share your concerns a little bit but don't push it. you can move a step further and say more alarming stuff ''hey ive heard that ISIS said they will use the migrants to bring terrorists in europe''. ''it's unfair don't you think that people are forced to be flooded with migrants without being asked''.
Step 3 is a slow process. Have discussions about more controversial facts but try doing this little bit little not all at once. ''wow Sweden is now the rape capital of europe did you know that ?'' ''most of these migrants have no education it might not be a good idea to bring them in a socialist country it it's gonna cost us a forture and our country have already a huge debt. the UN said sweden will be a third world country by 2030''. ''You know sometimes I wonder if theyre all migrants I mean why is there only males ? Shouldnt we get mostly kid and women ?''. ''hey did you know that 3/4 of islamists think women are inferior ?''. ''Merkel is really hated right now''
Step 4 you can start talking about how they're unwilling to assimilate to german value and want to bring ''islam home''. You can share how youre scared of the future of Germany as a nation. How you're scared that we might eventually lose your values, heritage and identity. How Islam value arent at all the same as germans value and how uncompatible they are.
If you make it there, you probably won
>>55920401
I'll say it again. This is a multi-conversation process. Don't rush it. It's deconditioning.
>>55923513
holy shit how could you possibly have known that letting in a million refugees from a terrorist infested warzone without background checks would lead to a terrorist attack. you must be some kind of wizard.
>>55920401
You can't argue with SJW in good faith
>>55920401
Never hurry into persuasion. If you go to fast, if you speak to radical they will deny acceptance to your ideas simply for the sake of not being wrong.
They will speak against every of your arguments just to be against you.
The easiest way is to lead them along the path of truth.
Wrong: Islam is shit.
Right: Don't you think there must be something about Islam leading to the fact that most religious violence is commited by muslims ?
Both create the same thought pattern in someones brain: Islam is bad.
Also you want to work with already existent war patterns.
Wrong: Muslims are just as bad as the fucking kikes.
Right: Muslims seem to have a very antisemitic tendency to them very often, which I find quite troubling. Don't get me started on their misogyny.
You use the Misogyny (-) link and the Antisemite (-) link to create an Muslim (-) link.
People think in very simple categories.
Most people use only two categories, a (+) and a (-) category, good and bad.
You need to manipulate them into putting leftist ideas into the (-) category by linking it with a lot of things, which are in this persons (-) category already.
Read the person you are talking to.
Find out which (-) and (+) things she has and switch the operator by linking a thing you want the person with things of that category you want it to belong to.
