I suppose if you’re not trying to let people know that their views are not acceptable then you’re part of the problem.

Yes, but how are you approaching this discussion?

I think there are different ways to handle this. On one hand you can be hostile and “give them what they deserve”. On the other hand you can engage in friendly arguments.

This is a story about how someone from the Westboro Baptist Church left because of the way that people engaged with her. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVV2Zk88beY

What’s worth noting from this story, people that were hostile in their interactions with her only served to entrench her further in her ideals.

What caused her to change her mind were the people that had “friendly arguments” and made an effort to learn where she was coming from.

She listed out 4 key points when engaging in difficult conversations. I extracted/paraphrased some of what she said below:

1. Don’t assume bad intent (assume good or neutral intent instead) - Assuming ill motive almost instantly cuts you off from truly understanding why someone does and believes as they do. We forget that they’re a human being with a lifetime of experience that shaped their mind and we get stuck on that first wave of anger and the conversation has a very hard time ever moving beyond it.

2. Ask Questions - Asking questions helps us map the disconnect. We can’t present effective arguments if we don’t understand where the other side is coming from.

3. Stay calm - She though that “[her] rightness justified [her] rudeness”. When things get too hostile during a conversation, tell a joke, recommend a book, change the subject, or excuse yourself from the conversation. The discussion isn’t over, but pause it for a time to let tensions dissapate.

4. Make the argument - One side effect of having strong beliefs is that we sometimes assume that the value of our position is, or should be, obvious and self-evident. That we shouldn’t have to defend our positions because they’re so clearly right and good. If it were that simple, we would all see things the same way.

You can’t expect others to spontaneously change their minds. If we want change, we have to make the case for it.

Username does not check out.

Ah, thanks, I probably just checked the “favorites” recently and assumed the “reduces” were still visible, that or my sense of time is way off.

I’m fairly certain that I checked it out on Kbin.Social about a month or two back and it still worked then, but Kbin.Social is currently down for maintenance, so I’m not sure.

How long ago is “quite a while”?

Former Redditors are used to upvotes/downvotes being private by default.

But this really depends on the user. Most reasons for this would be privacy related reasons.

• Some users vote differently knowing that their votes are public. If they want to vote freely they would consider an option like this.

• To combat profiling from others/corporations.

• To avoid certain users that take downvotes way too seriously.

That might be a setting specific to that instance. With other kbin instances it is possible to see reduces (or at least you have been able to do so in the past).

Maybe there’s been a recent update to all kbin instances so that the reduces tab is no longer clickable?

It doesn’t hide downvotes… It just calls them “Reduces”

If you want your upvotes/downvotes to actually be private, create a seperate account that only votes and never comments/posts.

Agreed. Traditionally, “gaslighting” is specific to cases where a manipulator tries to convince the other person that they are crazy over time. The end goal is to make the other person doubt their reality so much that they will only rely on the manipulator. Basically, it’s a conscious attempt to brainwash someone.

This comes from a story where a “husband secretly dims and brightens the indoor gas-powered lighting but insists his wife is imagining it, making her think she is going insane.” All so that he can steal from her. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting#cite_note-8

Unfortunately many today misuse this term to mean something closer to the definition of “lying” or when someone is trying hard to influence you…

Somewhat similar, this might be a fun thread to ask if anyone has experienced Synesthesia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synesthesia

Welcome to Lemmy.

You’ll also see them around here commonly blaming anything negative on “capitalism” as well (while ignoring the fact that pure capitalism doesn’t exist since the economy of almost every country is really a mix of capitalism and socialism).

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankie

Civil asset forfeiture in the U.S.

We’re supposed to be “innocent until proven guilty” but they get around this by saying that they’re essentially accusing the money (or car/home or whatever) of being used for crime. Then they confiscate it and the only way to get it back is to go to court and prove that your money is innocent.

The fact that cash/possessions can be taken away from you at anytime by federal agents (or by police in almost every State) without having to follow it up with any sort of case to prove that a crime occurred is ridiculous. And on top of that you can’t get the money back that you spent on attorney fees, so it’s pointless to spend money on an attorney if what was taken was less than a few thousand dollars.

Most people don’t know that this can happen or don’t seem to care enough because, “it would never happen to me, right?”

https://ij.org/issues/private-property/civil-forfeiture/

It’s more of a balance between how much is run by companies vs the regulations that the government imposes on those companies.

Pure capitalism doesn’t really exist anywhere.

And what kind of companies are you working for where you feel that your workplace is a dictatorship? If I ever felt that way I would leave and work somewhere else.

A balance between capitalism and socialism is what most countries are already using and has worked for a long time.

Communism is the one that only works in theory and anywhere it has been tried has quickly led to dictatorships or else it has fallen apart.

Edit: what most countries are using (not every country)

Communism wouldn’t fix much, and it would only be a temporary fix. It doesn’t work well at a larger scale which is why every country that has tried it has either fallen apart or turned into a dictatorship.

We’re better off finding the proper balance between capitalism and socialism until someone comes up with a better system that actually works.

I think you’re misunderstanding what the Forward Party is. You can be a part of any side of the political spectrum and still fall in line with the Forward Party.

The only thing that the Forward Party cares about is overhauling the voting system with something better: RCV, Star, Approval, etc.

They don’t take a stance on much of anything else.

And in terms of priority, any candidate endorsed by the Forward Party has my initial vote. If multiple candidates in the same race are backed by the forward party, then I will start digging in deeper to figure out which one I want to vote for.

My plan is to vote in candidates at all levels that are endorsed by The Forward Party.

We need to overhaul our voting system so that we’re not trapped in this downward spiral of a 2 party system that we’re currently in. Ranked Choice voting, Star voting, Approval voting… they all have pros and cons but any one of them is better than the current system that we have.

The way we get better options for Presidential candidates is to have a voting system that gives other parties a chance.

I don’t care if I have to vote for a particular Republican, Democrat, or some third party individual for this to be accomplished. Following the trend of “vote out all Republicans/Democrats” is how we got here in the first place.

Don’t forget the boots with the fur.

You had ONE job!