It’s easy to forget that no one is the villain in their own book. While the views might be now outdated, taking a moment to consider the other person’s perspective, even if it doesn’t align with my own, can really help with reaching a common understanding. There’s a drastic change when you see your ultra racist uncle as a man that’s simply absolutely frightened of change, and that is something I can get on with. Empathy goes a long way.
It’s easy to forget that no one is the villain in their own book.
Incidentally, why I hate a lot of movies where the villain is Dr. Evil who is part of the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, or something. Also why I think the Good / Evil alignment axis in D&D is bullshit.
ultra racist uncle as a man that’s simply absolutely frightened of change
Or just someone who grew up in a different time and was taught different things and doesn’t believe that what they were taught is out of date. Similarly, a kid might think they know everything but doesn’t have the wisdom and experience to know that things are more complicated than they seem on the surface. Both can be pretty obnoxious at a thanksgiving dinner table.
Take, for example, a discussion about how voting is done. The racist uncle might think that mail-in voting is a scam, and that the only way to vote should be in-person. He might not understand that poor people in cities sometimes have to wait in line for hours to vote, and that some might not be able to do that while holding down 2 jobs. He might not believe that the small number of polling places was a deliberate choice by a past government to discourage these people from voting.
But, at the same time, the kid might think that online voting is the obvious answer. The kid lives her entire life online and often votes on things. She knows a bit about encryption and has heard of blockchains and thinks that the only people against online voting are luddites who are afraid of technology. She might not understand the danger of being able to prove that you voted and who you voted for. She might not appreciate how sometimes low tech things are much harder to manipulate and fake.
So, there’s “cautious of change happening too quickly” vs. “too eager to embrace change without considering the consequences”. Everybody likes to think that they’re smack dab in the sweet spot between those two things, but everyone else is going to judge them as being too far to one side.
It’s easy to forget that no one is the villain in their own book.
They absolutely can and often are. They revel in it even.
(from a previous comment) Most of them know it takes energy to engage, and it takes a lot less out of them to engage in bad faith than it does for you to engage in good faith.
This is valuable effort that could be used to get people who are not active to be active, and instead its wasted on hateful people who aren’t simply “misunderstood” as naive viewpoints would have one believe.
When you talk to people and “figure out” that at a base level they want many of the same things you want, and then are confused at how to bridge the gap, its because the gap is, they only want the good things, if the people they hate can’t also have them. There is no bridge that can be gapped there. They, if trying to be polite/feign ignorance, will talk circles around those underlying views, but you can see in the loud ones and in the messaging of those they support what they are actually for clear as day. They want hierarchy, and they want people they hate below them. This is their single voter issue and its above the shirts on their backs.
It’s easy to forget that no one is the villain in their own book. While the views might be now outdated, taking a moment to consider the other person’s perspective, even if it doesn’t align with my own, can really help with reaching a common understanding. There’s a drastic change when you see your ultra racist uncle as a man that’s simply absolutely frightened of change, and that is something I can get on with. Empathy goes a long way.
Incidentally, why I hate a lot of movies where the villain is Dr. Evil who is part of the Brotherhood of Evil Mutants, or something. Also why I think the Good / Evil alignment axis in D&D is bullshit.
Or just someone who grew up in a different time and was taught different things and doesn’t believe that what they were taught is out of date. Similarly, a kid might think they know everything but doesn’t have the wisdom and experience to know that things are more complicated than they seem on the surface. Both can be pretty obnoxious at a thanksgiving dinner table.
Take, for example, a discussion about how voting is done. The racist uncle might think that mail-in voting is a scam, and that the only way to vote should be in-person. He might not understand that poor people in cities sometimes have to wait in line for hours to vote, and that some might not be able to do that while holding down 2 jobs. He might not believe that the small number of polling places was a deliberate choice by a past government to discourage these people from voting.
But, at the same time, the kid might think that online voting is the obvious answer. The kid lives her entire life online and often votes on things. She knows a bit about encryption and has heard of blockchains and thinks that the only people against online voting are luddites who are afraid of technology. She might not understand the danger of being able to prove that you voted and who you voted for. She might not appreciate how sometimes low tech things are much harder to manipulate and fake.
So, there’s “cautious of change happening too quickly” vs. “too eager to embrace change without considering the consequences”. Everybody likes to think that they’re smack dab in the sweet spot between those two things, but everyone else is going to judge them as being too far to one side.
Paradox of tolerance. Do I need to link the wiki? Ok
They absolutely can and often are. They revel in it even.
(from a previous comment) Most of them know it takes energy to engage, and it takes a lot less out of them to engage in bad faith than it does for you to engage in good faith.
This is valuable effort that could be used to get people who are not active to be active, and instead its wasted on hateful people who aren’t simply “misunderstood” as naive viewpoints would have one believe.
When you talk to people and “figure out” that at a base level they want many of the same things you want, and then are confused at how to bridge the gap, its because the gap is, they only want the good things, if the people they hate can’t also have them. There is no bridge that can be gapped there. They, if trying to be polite/feign ignorance, will talk circles around those underlying views, but you can see in the loud ones and in the messaging of those they support what they are actually for clear as day. They want hierarchy, and they want people they hate below them. This is their single voter issue and its above the shirts on their backs.