https://drhurd.com/2016/10/18/61340/
I keep hearing the question: How to weather political differences with friends and associates, given this combative presidential election year?
Then I read this at Psychology Today online, by Susan Heitler Ph.D.:
The impulse to convince others of the rightness of your view and the wrongness of theirs gets all the stronger for everyone when the issue feels like one of importance. The outcome of Presidential elections in [particular] is likely to have strong impacts on people’s lives, i.e., on their financial status, on how much government programs will either help or hinder them, on whether our citizens will be safe from physical danger with regard to guns, terrorism, international enemies, etc.
Some people have more, and some less, ability to allow others to be different. This ability takes patience. It takes willingness to give the other person the benefit of the doubt, that is, to assume that there is something valid in their viewpoint as well as in yours. This ability also rests on ability to keep your emotions in the calm zone.
If you go into a discussion on the premise, “I must change his mind…I must change his mind!” then it logically follows you’ll be much more intolerant and hostile than if you entered the discussion on a rational assumption. Example: “I probably won’t change his mind. But at least I got my point-of-view out there.”
Emotions arise because of what’s important to us. If things start to escalate, it’s easy to feed into the problem by resorting to personal attacks. But that’s a dead-end street, and an indication the discussion has already gone wrong. Better to abort than continue. The moment someone attacks me personally for my views, discussion is over. It’s worse than pointless to continue, because it’s no longer a political or intellectual discussion you’re having.
Rules for Radicals and other collectivist reference books have a few common threads. First, subvert the education system. Second, co-opt the media. Third, use ad hominem attacks on adversaries who use facts and reason to debate. Fourth, repeat falsehoods often enough and loud enough, and they will begin to ring as truth in the minds of people. What we are witnessing is a political landscape altered by these collectivist methods -- and to promote the collectivists vision. The playing field never was really level, but the collectivists have gained home-field advantage and they are playing downhill. Barring a Trump victory and true reforms in many areas, the Republic is almost certainly lost. Stay on your soap-boxes, make your deposit in the ballot box, and keep the ammo box dry and secure.
