CW Lounge

[fresh_42]

I searched for a place to report what happened to me today and vent my anger, but I couldn't find one. Then I thought a lounge may be a good place for small talk and less important matters. Hence, I created this thread. Feel free to report whatever is on your mind that isn't related to a specific thread,

 

[fresh_42]

Now, here is the story. My sister is currently here in Germany visiting friends and relatives. She (and her husband) are stubborn MAGAs, only consuming FOX. It is very hard to avoid any political discussion since there is no way to convince them. To my regret, she meanwhile also has a blue American passport, and not only her red European one. I wouldn't care, but that means: she voted!

Today, we discussed bureaucracy and that it is a universal issue, as my favorite Star Trek quote shows:

McCOY: The bureaucratic mentality is the only constant in the universe.

Then it almost escalated. I only mentioned that I'd like to have a party with a very simple program: Anybody adding a new regulation, law, rule, provision whatsoever must first eliminate two other existing ones. My sister's response: "That's what Trump does."

That was a tough one. Should I cry, laugh, argue, or what?

 

[fresh_42]

Another incident:

I searched for

Mississippi officer put on leave after killing baby in car outside Walmart

Protests erupt in Senatobia after one-year-old Kohen Wiley killed after police responded to report of shoplifting

www.theguardian.com

on my sister's tablet. I admit that I confused MS and MO. However, her FOX-infested tablet didn't come up with this news story. Her comment: If it were true, it would be on every nationwide channel.

As long as large parts of society are brainwashed by not reading what shouldn't exist, and therefore doesn't exist, is a serious social problem. FOX propaganda hinders any improvements! See how difficult a simple visit from your sister has become these days? These real-life insights into the MAGA scene are frightening!

 

[Grinkle]

That was a tough one. Should I cry, laugh, argue, or what?

My sister does not believe viruses exist - its a part of her generally anti-western-medicine worldview. FWIW, acknowledging that every sibling relationship is very unique - what occurs to me follows.

What I do in these situations is try to be as fact-based as I can.

How I'd apply this approach to the conversation you had, with respect to directions I might take the discussion -

Can she give examples of regulations that have been taken away? She should be able to, Trump has, in fact, done a fair bit of de-regulating. Then you can be discussing specific social aims based on where he has de-regulated, this might be a more constructive conversation.

Can we both agree on what sources of information we will consider credible? I always suggest Allsides as a first place for credible news.

Can we both agree on what constitutes diligence before accepting an assertion? This doesn't have to be a long list - at least one can start with searching both Fox.com and CNN.com for information on something that sounds like big news.

This opens me up to needing to pay attention to some things my sister considers credible that I consider not worth the time assessing, but since she feels the same way about things I consider credible, I guess its fair.

At least these lines of discussion keep my sister and I communicating without shouting - that is not nothing.

FOX propaganda hinders any improvements!

Silo'd information sourcing is, imo, a fundamental barrier to reducing US polarization. If you can't achieve anything else, you might try offering a trade to your sister with the goal of helping the two of you understand each other better - you watch an hour of Fox with her if she will watch an hour of whatever you suggest with you and after you agree to both do your best to identify at least one thing in each broadcast that you agree with.

I feel your pain, as we say in the US.

 

[fresh_42]

Can she give examples of regulations that have been taken away?

I can. He basically lifted all environmental regulations, even on tap water. Poisoning animals, us included, is not what I meant by reducing bureaucracy. But it is unreasonable to discuss anything with members of a sect. Avoidance is the only possible strategy. As I said, those insights into the MAGA cult are frightening. The search result for news on her tablet spoke volumes: FOX all over the place, plus another one I didn't know, and which I have forgotten.

 

[dlu]

brainwashed

We are all brainwashed from birth, some more than others, just by circumstance.

If by relying upon only FOX ( very few people have the time in the day to consume all the information from broadcasts and podcasts or energy to evaluate and form a more broadened view ) not causing undo detriment in her life, then perhaps you will have to just sigh and let it drop about politics.

Ask her who she thinks dresses Trump as he certainly cannot bend over to put on his pants, take her for some liverworst, then the beach and dunk her under the water for a laugh. have fun and wish her well when she leaves. Realize that people on the other side of the fence may be just as happy as anyone else.

 

[jack action]

@fresh_42 :
You and your sister seem to be very much alike. Both of you think:

• you are right;
• the other side is the problem;
• the other side is being manipulated;
• these people being manipulated shouldn't vote, and that would solve everything (i.e., you don't believe in democracy);
• rules are essential, but there are too many, and you want to keep only the regulations that affect your life positively or, at least, don't bother you.

You both have a problem talking to each other because you want to change the other to your liking instead of trying to understand what the other is living. Before discussing solutions, try discussing each other's problems, understanding where they come from.

And those problems cannot be about what other people might or might not do, but only about what YOU live (not about how others should live), what YOU control (not who you want to control), or what YOU fear will happen to YOU. It's about "I'm afraid I won't find a job", not "I fear someone else will take my job"; "I'm afraid I will get sick", not "I fear others will get me sick"; "I'm afraid I won't be able to control my life", not "I fear others will force me to do what I don't want to do".

You might find more in common that way and be able to build from there.

 

[fresh_42]

That might be true, but there is no way I would ever support or even understand a fascist, criminal, corrupt, sexual abuser with absolutely zero ethical values. No way. Knowing my German heritage makes this impossible.

And I do not consider it fair to compare environmental protection with, for example, customs regulations or the number of forms.

There are serious limits in your comparison. Watching for eternal chemicals in drinking water or not isn't a matter of opinion. It's a matter of sanity.

 

[jack action]

there is no way I would ever support or even understand a fascist, criminal, corrupt, sexual abuser with absolutely zero ethical values.

Nobody is asking you to do that. Nobody wants to support such people either. (That is probably what your sister has to say about the people you trust to be in power as well.) You are again looking at her proposed solutions (the people she wants to put in power) rather than the problems she is trying to fix.

Watching for eternal chemicals in drinking water or not isn't a matter of opinion. It's a matter of sanity.

It's probably what your sister has to say about chemtrails.

See, you both care about the quality of your drinking water. You both think it can be contaminated. You both think untrustworthy people are making bad decisions in the government institutions. You just disagree about who they are and what you should do about it.

The reason why your sister doesn't trust the people you trust is that they have been making the decisions for a while now, and she doesn't feel her life is getting better; maybe it even got worse. At this point, just repeating to her "trust the process" won't cut it. She is looking for answers elsewhere because nobody offers her solutions to her problems. Hammering her with "you are wrong" just pushes her into the corner opposing yours. In her logic, if you are supporting what is not working, then the opposite must be right; no more proof needed. "Science says this is good and it doesn't work for me, then science must be wrong about everything." "Democrats say this is good and it doesn't work for me, then they must be wrong, and the Republicans must be right." It is not about what science or Democrats say; it is about how it correlates with her life.

And the drinking water might be the least of her concern; her original problem, the one that started it all, might be completely elsewhere.

Be the bigger man, and stop acting like her; stop judging, start having compassion.

 

[Borg]

I have to side with @fresh_42 on this one. I also have a sister who has been drinking from the MAGA Kool Aid even though she doesn't seem to realize it. I spent 10 years trying get her to understand the damage that a person like that would do to the country and the world. Her only goal was to see Roe v. Wade overturned so felony convictions and insurrections didn't matter because "they're all criminals". The damage that he's doing this term now directly affects my wife and I regularly but my sister got what she wanted. For myself, I decided that I was through talking to a wall of willful ignorance.

 

[Grinkle]

@Borg @fresh_42 I don’t see any way that deciding to end communication is helpful at any level, even a personal level. If we are done talking to each other, we have conceded that democracy is just too uncomfortable to bear living with, imo.

 

[fresh_42]

@Borg @fresh_42 I don’t see any way that deciding to end communication is helpful at any level, even a personal level. If we are done talking to each other, we have conceded that democracy is just too uncomfortable to bear living with, imo.

Democracy is based on reasoning, not on faith. If one side refuses to accept facts as arguments, then you're dealing with a cult. And there is no way to deal with cult members. You need a common base. And MAGA doesn't accept arguments. I mean, the entire Republican Party ignores facts! Good luck discussing with them!

And in the MAGA case, it is specifically difficult to find reliable references. In the end, only the exact wording and signature count. Everything else can easily be ignored or disparaged as, in modern words, fake news or alternative truths. I don't know where to find all these original quotations, and honestly, they are too ugly to spend time on them. That's what journalists are for. However, nowadays, they have lost their reputation in large parts of society, and considering FOX, some of them well-deserved. The last time she was here, she even scolded me when I quoted the NYT. Thanks, but no thanks. I am well-trained in endless discussions with the Witnesses and Mormons when I was a teenager. I already know the outcome.

An example: I dared to point out the contradiction when Pro-Life fanatics shot abortion doctors. Her answer: statistical outlier. And I do not really want to search all the incidents. She also asked me whether I knew what an abortion is. Firstly, I do, she does not, and secondly, it is not half as hard as her strict Catholic mind has been told. Sure, it is a mental stress situation, but medically not a big deal. Have fun discussing that with the Catholic Church.

I call this line of argument Nazi-Triathlon.
Stage one, Denial: "It did not happen."
If you insist or even prove it happened, then comes
Stage two, Belittlement: "Statistical outlier."
If you still reason about it, you will find yourself confronted with
Stage three, Justification: "Do you know what an abortion is?"


Analyse discussions under that pattern. You will be surprised how often you will find it, particularly on the far right.

 

[Borg]

Isn't it interesting how they don't notice a statistical outlier of indecency when it comes to their dear leader? Confronting them with his extreme character flaws always results in the "they're all criminals" response like he isn't the most extreme example there ever was.

 

[jack action]

All I hear is "I tell her she's wrong and she won't agree with me."

How does that relate to anything I'm proposing?

Anyone who joins a cult was either hurt or abused before joining. They are not only easy prey, but they are the only possible prey for these cults.

They join these cults because they listen to them when they feel unheard and abandoned by everyone else.

So, if you are convinced they join a cult, find out what their original wound is. Listening is not trying to convince them of something.

but my sister got what she wanted.

And what did she want? I mean, on a personal level, why is it so important for her to stop others from getting an abortion? Why choose to make them criminals versus helping them to come to the "right" conclusion by themselves? Especially knowing the opposite side will not take this loss sitting down; they will fight more to overturn this.

---

Here is some information about talking with a loved one who joined a cult to illustrate what I meant:

Core Principles for Effective Communication​

Build rapport first, address beliefs second. Before discussing concerning beliefs, rebuild your relationship through shared activities and positive interactions. Focus on their thinking process, not their conclusions. Instead of attacking their beliefs, explore how they reached those conclusions.

Use Socratic questioning rather than statements. Ask curious, open-ended questions like “Help me understand what convinced you about this” or “How did you come to that conclusion?” This approach helps them examine their own reasoning without feeling attacked.

Practical Do’s and Don’ts​

DO:

• Express genuine curiosity about their perspective
• Share your feelings using “I feel” statements (“I feel worried when we can’t spend time together”)
• Ask permission before sharing information (“Would you be interested in hearing about a similar group I learned about?”)
• Maintain consistent, loving contact regardless of their involvement
• Focus on shared values and positive memories
• Be patient—belief change typically takes months or years

DON’T:

• Use words like “cult,” “brainwashed,” or “extremist”
• Attack their leader, doctrine, or group directly
• Overwhelm them with facts or contradictory information
• Give ultimatums or cut off contact
• Mock their beliefs or make them feel foolish
• Rush the process or expect immediate change

Strategic Conversation Techniques​

Start with validation: Acknowledge what initially attracted them to the group. Many cults appeal to legitimate desires for community, purpose, or social justice.

Ask reality-testing questions: “If you knew then what you know now, would you still have joined?” or “What would need to happen for you to reconsider your involvement?”

Share parallel examples: Discuss other groups with similar characteristics without directly comparing them to your loved one’s group.

Focus on restrictions: Gently explore limitations on their freedom, finances, or relationships without directly challenging the group’s authority.

Remember that people rarely leave cults due to factual arguments alone. They leave when their psychological needs are met elsewhere, they develop confidence to face uncertainty, and they have supportive relationships outside the group. Your consistent love and patience may be the lifeline they need when they’re ready to question their involvement.

The following quote is about Ryan and Kelly, two experts on getting people out of cults. This is after a man's wife quit a religious group:

In Ryan’s telling, she loved chatting with Kelly and himself because they so clearly understood what she appreciated about the group.

Trying to convince someone out of MAGA has to be about them, not about you.