Message from @Bogl - CA
Discord ID: 539659345508696066
We have to remember to talk to people in a way that appeals to them
I actually really dislike the new red ice videos. They are so over the top with the editing lately. I actually want to cut half of the video off.
@ophiuchus Ya, that's what I'm worried about. Though maybe that's only an issue for people who are already deeply into liberal politics?
When talking to the general population, emotional appeals > logical arguments
ya that's why I consider Red Ice to be better introductory content
I wouldn't send AmRen to someone unless they're already pretty deeply interested in race relations and politics
The majority of the population doesn’t think about issues logically, on both sides of the spectrum. We’re much better off creating better emotional arguments that trying in vain to convince everyone to be incredibly rationalist about this
Most of us are here because of autism
Having a black woman (tree of life) agree with Jared Taylor gives white people permission to take his points seriously.
It's how they work.
Autistic rationalism made us realize all of this earlier than most people will
White people look for how minorities react before listening to race debates.
I agree with that @ophiuchus
Dude if I could break one single thing in the normie consciousness it would be “being outraged =/= being correct”
“Hispanics outraged that some news anchor said they almost all become democrats”
They vote for Democrats 8/2, being outraged doesn’t mean something isn’t true
God ree
@Jacob good for you for watching debunking videos!
I try to do that
We're actually thinking of reading anti identitarian literature in the book club and discussing how we would respond to it
it's pretty important to encourage open discourse and not live in an ideological ghetto
Although the arguments are usually "supremacist"
And hate
*yawn
i read this thing that tried to debunk Jared Taylor and race science, and didn't find anything I couldn't argue against (https://archive.fo/TqLbH)
a lot of the arguments are semantic
in general
or else saying that even if something were true, we shouldn't think about it
Knowing, and being able to argue the opponents arguments, is what makes us sharp.
I actually remember when I was more liberal I watched a debate between Tommy Robinson and some black rapper and came into it sympathetic to the black guy. Tommy Robinson kept asking him "what did I say that was racist?" and I was like "what *did* he say that was racist?". It was still a while before I switched sides but even then I was starting to question.
I found it really silly that he was just evading the question
To be honest I still get that feeling when I see the way some people on our side argue. Like I'll say "libtard" amongst ourselves as a joke but irl that's a pretty shitty way to talk to people.
Being proficient at debate is similar to finding and exploring the falsifiability of a scientific hypothesis. Staying ahead of the opponent by stating and countering arguments before they say them.
Absolutely. Another thing we're wanting to do eventually is set up mock debates on the Literature server where one of us plays devil's advocate.
Yeah I was part of the discussion last night (listening). I’m in.
IE debate team?
The first meet up I went to had a hot-seat style thing where one guy was being questioned by the rest of us as hostile journalists
that's actually pretty clever
@ophiuchus so do you think it would still be a good idea to send people to Red Ice, or would it be an issue that they see a debunking video and think "oh it's been debunked"
The one guy was so good you'd have thought he was actually an SPLC/antifa journo