Let’s take some of the items in the first post—concerning what you can do in the name of liberty and justice, reason and logic, individualism and civilization—and talk about them in greater detail.
First up: talking to your friends and others. If you have heard of the concept of “the millionaire next door”—just a normal-seeming person who turns out to be quite wealthy, then perhaps the same idea applied to a persuasive and convincing speaker would make sense as well.
Of course, the most important prerequisite is to know what you are talking about. Do your homework, keep abreast of the issues that you might want to talk about, think through the possible responses and prepare counter-responses, etc. Keep a document (or several!) with both your summary talking points and any additional links or footnotes with the further data that backs them up.
However, the most difficult obstacle is not generally this component—learning the facts—but rather having the courage to speak up when the opportunity arises! I am sure we all know that some such situations are easier than others. For example:
Your best friend, who also agrees with you politically
Difficulty level: Easy
Talking politics to these close friends who agree with us is so easy that we all probably do it frequently already. Do give yourself some points for it, though, because you are accomplishing good things:
- Helping to keep each others’ spirits up! We need this.
- Practicing putting these ideas into words.
- Sharing at least somewhat different strategies and sound bites for arguing different points. You will keep each other’s arsenals of evidence as well stockpiled as possible.
However, hopefully you also talk to at least some of the following. . .
Your friends who are somewhat apathetic
Difficulty level: Easy
Now, I am not saying it is easy to actually convince them to do something; I am saying it is not difficult to make yourself talk to them from time to time about the importance of activism on behalf of Big Individualism.
With most such people, it is probably better to talk to them in small bites. Choose one issue that you think will really resonate with them, mention it in your chosen sound bite, and then allow the conversation to move on whenever it wants to.
While it might seem that this small dose might be too little to really move them, the bigger danger may be that constantly pushing the matter beyond where the friends want to talk about it only makes them less likely to want to talk with you in the future.
And, believe me, you are doing good with these small nuggets of wisdom and clarity.
Your friends who disagree with you
Difficulty level: Moderate to Hard
Make no mistake, going down this path can lead to the end of the friendship. It is best to be aware of that possibility before starting down this road. On the other hand, if you are very civil and mature in your arguments (as of course you are) and you find out that they truly believe that “all Trump voters are devils” or some such thing, how much are you really losing if a schism develops between you and your friend?
In a best-case scenario, you and your friend can “agree to disagree,” but hopefully also come away with a better understanding of the other person’s position. You may not have learned much, actually, because we hear the talking points of the lefty regressives all the time. However, we need them to actually hear our point of view, which many of them have precious little occasion to do. In effect, you are serving as an ambassador for the side of freedom and rational thinking.
Your professional contacts and colleagues
Difficulty level: Moderate to Difficult
Be careful here, too, because it may be a real possibility that you will lose your job, for that cardinal sin of believing that All Lives Matter, that all discrimination is bad, that reality in order to be commanded must be obeyed, etc., etc.
Here you have to be exceedingly mature and professional at all times. You probably should know what your strategy is (see below). Even then, it may feel like you have to “choose your battles,” but often it is enough to say “I disagree.” This statement will usually lead someone to ask why, which should buy you a moment or two to formulate your reply.
Strangers
Difficulty level: Moderate to Difficult
The reaction you will get from total strangers will always be an unknown. Carefully gauge the circumstances and the context before you speak. Of course, there are times when you really should say nothing—if it could be some murderous thug (i.e., Antifa, etc.), you might have nothing to gain and everything to lose. However, a quick, civil comment or rejoinder in a store, at a public event, etc., is often well worth the effort. You may be surprised how often someone else within earshot gives you a smile and a nod for your remark—and you may have just inspired that person to speak up in the future as well.
Find a strategy that works for you
In order to build confidence not only to speak up, but to feel ready for any counterattack from the other person, it is good to have a favorite go-to strategy in mind, such as one of the following:
The Socratic method
Turn everything into a question. There are many times when it can feel decidedly less risky for you to ask a question than to make a statement. Any idea can be expressed in either manner. Not only is it not less effective to phrase something as a question, sometimes it is rhetorically more effective to do so.
The Philosopher: Go deep
Where things get the most emotionally charged is at the surface level of politics. Try taking the philosophical concept that is at the root of the disagreement and talk in those terms. This approach, too, can be quite effective, and often allows the tone to stay much less personal, heated, and defensive.
The Diplomat: Find common ground
There is almost always a way to find common ground. Start from that point, define it, and then work towards the question “How do we best accomplish this?” For example, if they call Trump a Nazi, we could say “So we agree that Nazism is bad. What is Nazism? Dictatorial, socialist government control of every aspect of their citizens’ lives . . .”
The Skeptic: Question their sources; define concepts and terms
This one is fairly easy: they make a statement, and you ask them what their source is. From there, you can decide whether to:
- Give examples to show how unreliable that source is
- Question whether that source really says that (as sometimes people will just quickly make up a source)
- Offer an alternative source.
This approach may even lead to an exchange—you read my source and I’ll read yours. All you need for a win is not necessarily to convince them of your source’s reliability, but rather to get them to acknowledge some possible skepticism towards their go-to sources.
A variant of this approach is to constantly ask them what they mean by various terms, because part of the opposition’s very modus operandi is to butcher, distort, and obfuscate the meanings of words. This approach can work well, but be sure to have a solid definition ready at the top of your head for each such term.
Let them know they’re being used
Another tack would be to explain to the person how they are being used by big government/media/tech/etc. This strategy is effective after you have found some sort of common ground with them, or after they have professed to be for “the people”, or for justice, or for science, etc. There is, after all, lots of room to tell them how much the people issuing the talking points are not held to the same laws and limitations of their minions, and indeed how this is always the case in totalitarian regimes.
The Anti-hypocrite
Not every statement our opponents make will be hypocritical, but don’t worry—you will never have to wait long at all. This approach does require the most preparation, in that it is most effective if you are ready with a list of at least a couple counter examples for every situation in which they applied a different standard.
This approach can also be combined nicely with the Socratic method.
Regardless of the strategy you choose, go on offense! You have nothing to apologize for as an advocate of the truth and of “liberty and justice for all.” Their position, on the other hand, is so full of contradictions, hypocrisy, immorality, lies, tyrannical elitism, bigotry, chauvinism, discrimination, oppression and suppression, bullying and terrorism, that the opportunities to go on the (verbal) attack are legion.
Another thing we all need to do is to keep our minds and voices ever ready for action. We can all think of times when we were caught flat-footed—where the lefty regressive bromide just suddenly appeared out of nowhere, and the shock of the realization left us stunned and speechless for that critical moment. Doesn’t that feeling of having missed that perfect opportunity make you cringe?
One of the best ways not to be caught off guard is always to be proactively looking for an opportunity to say something in support of reason and liberty. Do not feel compelled to state all of these! In fact you may let the majority of them go by unstated. However, always looking for and thinking about such opportunities ensures that you do not get caught off guard and helps you to continue to polish and improve your rhetorical repertoire over time.
Again, you may be thinking “I just want to be left alone to live my life. I do not want to have to be the star player on life’s forensics team.” I understand and sympathize.
However, in the world that we live in right now, can you afford to take that position?
Objective and Skeptical 