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.
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.