Show him the video of the British police breaking down a man's door because they heard music and decided it meant he must have been violating their totalitarian COVID lockdown.
The abject moral bankruptcy and corruption of every single large political party.
If they aren't upset at their police and government, then it's clear they aren't paying attention. Furthermore, they haven't reasoned themselves into their position; they haven't reasoned about it at all.
This one. Also, why stop at Rotherham when there's easily dozens of other towns and cities where it was neglected if not outright covered up?
There were so many covid stories of totalitarianism as well, and I'd try to show the obvious hypocrisy/difference in treatment between the lockdown protesters vs BLM riots during lockdown.
If they aren't upset at their police and government, then it's clear they aren't paying attention.
Your politicians are counting on the fact that very few people pay attention, and even many of those who do are deceived - by being persuaded that "the Conservatives are WORSE!" or "Labour is WORSE!" and thereby becoming shills for one den of thieves against a supposedly worse one.
Furthermore, they haven't reasoned themselves into their position; they haven't reasoned about it at all.
That is why it is impossible to get them away from that position.
Faith cannot be undone by evidence, nor can an assumption/irrefutable claim like "these politicians are better".
Do not even try, because that will backfire - he will become defensive. Instead, use humor (as that disarms) while referring to the things they do when it is relevant, e.g. expenses scandals.
Modern Western man lives in a Disney-like world, where the propaganda he is fed by the news media is "objective truth", and his country's motivations are always noble - while the ones his country uses aggression against are the bad guys. It is a profound hypnotic spell that is not easily dispelled.
Knowing nothing about this guy other than you calling him a libtard, I would go with Antonio here mostly. I would give the guy one chance, by showing him some of the countless news stories of people being arrested for saying naughty things online in the UK, just in case he is entirely blind to what is going on. And if (or, I'm willing to bet, when) when he tries to justify those (which I'm willing to bet he will) then drop it like a hot potato.
Nah this is ineffective rhetoric. You're trying to fight feelings with facts.
You gotta use rhetorical tactics to change an opinion such as:
Our politicians are better
Note that this says nothing about the actual quality, only that they aren't quite as bad. There is still a lot of room to bring opinion of them down.
"oh sure, they don't leave quite as big a blood trail as say Hilary Clinton, but they're still pretty piss poor, did you see that awful thing where they..." and then show them the evidence.
I've agreed with their point because it's ultimately inconsequential and has an easy opening to get them to agree with my broader point.
Show him the statistic that 9,000 girls are raped every year in Muslim Grooming Gangs, the police not only knew about it, but were ordered to not investigate in order not to appear "racist". Also, that it's still going on. Also, that US Intelligence are the people who created the term "Londinistan" due to the amount of Al-Qaeda terrorists that were operating with impunity in the UK. That's a name that they came up with in the fucking 90's.
When the chips are down, the cops will let your children be sold into sexual slavery because Labor is courting the votes of actual fucking terrorists.
It's very tricky. They've chosen their world view, or had it chosen for them. They have to get there on their own, but giving them some of the information might be able to help them. I'd say be calm, don't treat them like morons. If you antagonize them, they'll get defensive and double down. Plant the seed of doubt in them via video evidence as others have mentioned and, if they really do develop doubts and voice them, their own side will be the one to attack them. That's where redpilling really happens.
Be calm, be logical, be polite, and don't try to drastically change their world view...just get them to start questioning; that's really all you can do.
Last bit of general advice; make it apply to them. That's the other ingredient of a good redpilling; it has to affect them personally. So if you can find stories of police abusing someone for something you know your friend also does, that's good. If they're the SJW style of libtard, videos of police abusing nonwhites and women is also good. Again, your goal is the nefarious seed of doubt. Try to get a bit of a wedge in their own arguments, and see if they start to pick at it.
If you antagonize them, they'll get defensive and double down.
The problem is that people always get defensive if you try to persuade them in any way, at least when it comes to things that they have been thoroughly conditioned to believe.
E.g. if you bring up in a discussion about Ukraine that Western governments never condemn Ukraine for shelling civilians in Donetsk, he will try to look for excuses as to why this is just and correct. Rather, you want him to ask that of himself, rather than try to answer you.
This is a fairly universally applicable rule. I've even seen people who oppose certain coronavirus restrictions try to excuse their governments for implementing those very same restrictions when hearing them criticized for it.
I am not sure what this is. Probably a deep-seated human drive towards conformity, as those who did not conform were historically quite likely to have their head chopped off.
I also think that people are quite stubborn, and that people are very bad at making arguments that are persuasive to people with whom they disagree. No right-winger has ever persuaded me of anything in a direct discussion with me, only that he is a jackass who is very wrong. But left-wingers have persuaded me that right-wingers have a point.
That's where redpilling really happens.
Not sure if true, I've heard that American communists solidified the allegiance of new members by having them hand out communist fliers. They would be so thoroughly abused by members of the public for it that their communism would be even more entrenched.
Plant the seed of doubt in them
This really works best. Ultimately, it is something that people have to do themselves, not something you can do for them.
Be calm, be logical, be polite
Above all else, have a sense of humor. If you can make someone laugh, that sweeps away all his defenses.
There's that time a politician drove around a neighborhood with a megaphone telling people not to vote for the opposition because he was a Jew and Muslims aren't supposed to support Jews.
Show him the video of the British police breaking down a man's door because they heard music and decided it meant he must have been violating their totalitarian COVID lockdown.
Ask them how well the 'pride bobby cap' wearing officers in the trans pride flag cars will be able to police Islamic neighborhoods.
Rotherham coverup. Rotherham coverup. Rotherham coverup.
The abject moral bankruptcy and corruption of every single large political party.
If they aren't upset at their police and government, then it's clear they aren't paying attention. Furthermore, they haven't reasoned themselves into their position; they haven't reasoned about it at all.
This one. Also, why stop at Rotherham when there's easily dozens of other towns and cities where it was neglected if not outright covered up?
There were so many covid stories of totalitarianism as well, and I'd try to show the obvious hypocrisy/difference in treatment between the lockdown protesters vs BLM riots during lockdown.
Your politicians are counting on the fact that very few people pay attention, and even many of those who do are deceived - by being persuaded that "the Conservatives are WORSE!" or "Labour is WORSE!" and thereby becoming shills for one den of thieves against a supposedly worse one.
That is why it is impossible to get them away from that position.
You can't.
Faith cannot be undone by evidence, nor can an assumption/irrefutable claim like "these politicians are better".
Do not even try, because that will backfire - he will become defensive. Instead, use humor (as that disarms) while referring to the things they do when it is relevant, e.g. expenses scandals.
Modern Western man lives in a Disney-like world, where the propaganda he is fed by the news media is "objective truth", and his country's motivations are always noble - while the ones his country uses aggression against are the bad guys. It is a profound hypnotic spell that is not easily dispelled.
Knowing nothing about this guy other than you calling him a libtard, I would go with Antonio here mostly. I would give the guy one chance, by showing him some of the countless news stories of people being arrested for saying naughty things online in the UK, just in case he is entirely blind to what is going on. And if (or, I'm willing to bet, when) when he tries to justify those (which I'm willing to bet he will) then drop it like a hot potato.
Nah this is ineffective rhetoric. You're trying to fight feelings with facts.
You gotta use rhetorical tactics to change an opinion such as:
Note that this says nothing about the actual quality, only that they aren't quite as bad. There is still a lot of room to bring opinion of them down.
"oh sure, they don't leave quite as big a blood trail as say Hilary Clinton, but they're still pretty piss poor, did you see that awful thing where they..." and then show them the evidence.
I've agreed with their point because it's ultimately inconsequential and has an easy opening to get them to agree with my broader point.
Show him the statistic that 9,000 girls are raped every year in Muslim Grooming Gangs, the police not only knew about it, but were ordered to not investigate in order not to appear "racist". Also, that it's still going on. Also, that US Intelligence are the people who created the term "Londinistan" due to the amount of Al-Qaeda terrorists that were operating with impunity in the UK. That's a name that they came up with in the fucking 90's.
When the chips are down, the cops will let your children be sold into sexual slavery because Labor is courting the votes of actual fucking terrorists.
It's very tricky. They've chosen their world view, or had it chosen for them. They have to get there on their own, but giving them some of the information might be able to help them. I'd say be calm, don't treat them like morons. If you antagonize them, they'll get defensive and double down. Plant the seed of doubt in them via video evidence as others have mentioned and, if they really do develop doubts and voice them, their own side will be the one to attack them. That's where redpilling really happens.
Be calm, be logical, be polite, and don't try to drastically change their world view...just get them to start questioning; that's really all you can do.
Last bit of general advice; make it apply to them. That's the other ingredient of a good redpilling; it has to affect them personally. So if you can find stories of police abusing someone for something you know your friend also does, that's good. If they're the SJW style of libtard, videos of police abusing nonwhites and women is also good. Again, your goal is the nefarious seed of doubt. Try to get a bit of a wedge in their own arguments, and see if they start to pick at it.
The problem is that people always get defensive if you try to persuade them in any way, at least when it comes to things that they have been thoroughly conditioned to believe.
E.g. if you bring up in a discussion about Ukraine that Western governments never condemn Ukraine for shelling civilians in Donetsk, he will try to look for excuses as to why this is just and correct. Rather, you want him to ask that of himself, rather than try to answer you.
This is a fairly universally applicable rule. I've even seen people who oppose certain coronavirus restrictions try to excuse their governments for implementing those very same restrictions when hearing them criticized for it.
I am not sure what this is. Probably a deep-seated human drive towards conformity, as those who did not conform were historically quite likely to have their head chopped off.
I also think that people are quite stubborn, and that people are very bad at making arguments that are persuasive to people with whom they disagree. No right-winger has ever persuaded me of anything in a direct discussion with me, only that he is a jackass who is very wrong. But left-wingers have persuaded me that right-wingers have a point.
Not sure if true, I've heard that American communists solidified the allegiance of new members by having them hand out communist fliers. They would be so thoroughly abused by members of the public for it that their communism would be even more entrenched.
This really works best. Ultimately, it is something that people have to do themselves, not something you can do for them.
Above all else, have a sense of humor. If you can make someone laugh, that sweeps away all his defenses.
There's that time a politician drove around a neighborhood with a megaphone telling people not to vote for the opposition because he was a Jew and Muslims aren't supposed to support Jews.
Why dont you ask your conpro friends? you seem to like bitching about this board on conpro so just go ask them instead of asking our opinions.
How about stop glowing first.