“The first thing for me was he didn’t release the Epstein files. They’re even acting like they didn’t exist,” he said, before moving on to his other grievances. “And, of course, they’re sending Israel and Ukraine all of our tax dollars just like the numb-nuts before him did. Putting America last, and now he’s blaming the beef farmers for the price of beef.”
Mitchell added, “Hey, I’m not biased, man. He talked a good game; he tricked me. I was fooled. I admit it.”
“Yeah, I do think that Donald Trump is that beast of Revelation 13:3.”
No he didn’t, at all. You’re just really stupid so you think he did.
It’s really obvious if you’ve learned to think critically. If you haven’t, then it’s easy to fall for the lies. There is a reason why he’s the central public figure of the GOP. The man provably knows how to rile up crowds.
If you haven’t learned critical thinking, that is the same thing as being dumb.
I’d argue that’s more ignorance, than stupidity; you can’t help what you aren’t aware of or weren’t taught.
That excuse works for children, not grown adults.
I mean, I think it’s complicated; there is something to be said about the intentional suppression of education that the right has studiously (ironically) worked on precisely because a less informed population is easier to manipulate, etc.
I don’t think it absolves them of fault (I insatiably read every Leopards Ate My Face story as much as the next person; no lie).
I’d, also, contemplate that it’s maybe not sufficiently explained by just lack of critical thinking if they’re on their third round of voting for him.
I just meant that – if your argument is that they weren’t taught critical thinking – it, definitionally, can’t be stupidity but ignorance because stupidity is when you knew full-well and better while ignorance is when you don’t know something.
(I also think there’s an unintentional leaning, on Lemmy, towards a eugenics-sympathetic “well, these people are just constitutionally stupid and that’s just the way they are” relatively often (though the current state of the world makes it a bit understandable). I’m not saying OP thinks that but I could see those who’re sympathetic to that worldview easily working with the original statement, as worded; and I think we easily don’t walk into those sort of pitfalls when we’re particular and accurate about our words and definitions (hence, also, why I was pointing out that it can’t be stupidity, definitionally))
I’d always thought I was missing something about critical thought because people talk about it like it’s anything more than not trusting literally everything you hear and trying to be rational about your responses.
Is that not what everyone does all the time? To various states of success, obviously.
the entire US public education system was designed around not teaching critical thinking skills, specifically to make compliant factory workers…
It’s fascinating how many, who believe they are “thinking critically”, follow Trump because he “talks good”. They think so critically, that they don’t notice the irony.
“He is The One. He
movesthinks like they do.”He “talked a good game” if you are a moronic bigot. This guy is still a moronic bigot despite his “revelations”.
At least he’s admitting he’s wrong. I’m willing to let him save face a bit even if it’s completely fucking obvious to anyone that paid attention to his first term that he’s completely full of shit.
Agreed. People can’t help being stupid. People can only fix ignorance, and he’s done what he can (so far).
Depends on how you interpret the word “good”. Not in a moral sense obviously, but good as in “effective”? Trump got elected POTUS twice, despite (or because of) being one of the most despicable human beings to ever exist. Not a great orator, and every time I see him speak I want to vomit, but still, objectively I’d have to concede that he did indeed talk a good game.
I’ve always hated this “Well, you can’t argue with the results” metric. The calculation I get from Trump’s victory is that you could have any number of scandals plaguing a candidate, and as long as they’re ultra-racist and churn out the same brain-dead ultra-nationalist talking points we’d been warning about since the classic “Don’t Be a Sucker” PSA, central America will vote en masse for them.
It says far more about THEM than it does about that THING as an orator. It pains me to admit truth to the articles claiming “This was not a pure mistake. This is always who America has been.”
What I’m saying is that Trump has the right set of ingredients to win the support of these morons, and while his personal “qualities” like privilege, cruelty, racism, malleability and hubris are a part of that, the whole package doesn’t work unless he can deliver the right kind of speech, which gives the fascists what they want. The dumbest of them find validation in the idiocy of Trump’s words. For a movement which rejects good faith discourse entirely, the endless lies, the self-aggrandizement, the dogwhistles are all what they want to hear. The incoherent rambling delivery is just perfect for avoiding any accountability. It’s all the more appealing because honest people find it infuriating, and it degrades every person and institution which has to engage with it.
I don’t want to imply any great skill here, it’s just the way Trump is, but it happens to be the right play for this game. Which, I agree, is far more an indictment of the game than an accolade for the player.
Did he get elected really? In his own words he had “all the votes [he] needs”, he didn’t care how the popular vote landed because it wasn’t relevant, those aren’t the votes that actually do anything.
He got the people who determine rhe results of the election to say he was elected.
To assume all these people are stupid is in itself stupid.
People have been gaslight for decades now and most people are not critically online like us so it can be hard to know you’re being lied to.
Edit: Before saying the same thing to me again and again, please read my other replies before coming at me. The replies below show me that you people don’t care about changing minds and just care about being right in a place where most of are left leaning, yet all you do is talk with other left leaning people with no ability to change minds, which I’ve done several times. I would argue I am doing more for the cause than you lot.
Falling for gaslighting as blatant as Trump means they were stupid. Every lie he told was obviously a lie. He constantly contradicted himself in obvious ways between or within the same rambling incoherent sentences.
Yes, they are all stupid. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
Respectively, I don’t agree and I’ve had success in de radicalising 5 friends and family which I couldn’t do if I wrote them off as stupid.
Ignorant, sure. Stupid, no.
Have fun watching them continue to vote Republican in future elections when they fall for the next stupidly obvious thing.
Yep. Most Trump voters are not radicals. They don’t really have political opinions. They really are just stupid, spiteful, hateful people. You can’t really cure that.
Have fun assuming everybody is American.
Also, for your lack of faith. I guess I wonder why you even comment on this stuff if your intention isn’t to change views then is it just ego stroking?
You responded to a post about people falling for Trump rhetoric, so assuming you were as well is just working in the context of the thread. Insert far right if you can’t wrap your head around context.
It is acknowledging that de radicalizing someone stupid enough to fall for far right rhetoric isn’t something that is a one and done deal. Extremely few people do more than kind of change their viewpoint on one or two topics and will easily slide back into the same mindset on new or even the same topics when exposed to more of the same.
Saying you deradicalized a half dozen people is bragging that you got some children to settle down for an hour. It is extremely likely that they just say nice things in front of you to shut you up while continuing the same thing when you aren’t watching.
I don’t agree. You’re essentially teaching people to question what they’re told and at least pause for thought before maybe sharing that misinformation online.
If people are aware that the media is manipulating them and they’ve been shown concrete examples then it stands to reason that they will get better at this the more they do.
Otherwise what’s the fucking point? Is just a circle jerk no?
That isn’t how it works when they were stupid enough to fall for it the first time.
That isn’t saying not to try, just pointing out that it is not something that you finished and deserves a pat yourself on the back for a job well done. It is step one in a lifelong effort if you don’t want them to backslide right back into the same shit.
Pandering to the hopelessly stupid got us in this mess.
Frankly I don’t agree.
I’ve had success so far in de radicalising 5 friends/family. Which is5 more votes for a party I would want in power than before.
If you’re going to just ignore them nothing is going to change. They are not suddenly going to wake up and vote Green.
Can you honestly say you’d trust their decision making without you on their shoulder? They’ve already demonstrated who they are very clearly, when someone tells you they’re horrible you should believe them.
Yes I can.
I literally witnessed my closest friend pushing back against some of his friends on my talking points. He wants racist or an idiot, he’d been lied to and pointed to the wrong people as the enemy. Now after me working on him for months on end he sees that he was wrong and how the media manipulated him and will push back against others.
I can see a time when he himself converts someone else and perhaps they will also pay it forward.
As I asked the other person, what’s the point on you commenting on political stuff if not to change minds? Otherwise it’s just stroking your ego.
any resources on the subject of deprogramming these people you’d recommend.
i know the first bits is like “build trust, don’t come from place of judgement yada yada” but how do you actually get them to finally start thinking critically?
Honestly I don’t have any resources really and I think it’s only possible with people you spend a lot of time with.
My method has been quite simple really and I’ll tend to ask questions, to which I know the answers but I know they won’t have any clue.
Example: Lots of anti asylum seeker rhetoric in my country right now. So the first thing I ask is how does one apply for asylum in the UK on boats.
Now I’ve never met anybody on the right able to answer this. So I’ll show them the government site which clearly states to apply for asylum you need to be in the UK.
Then I can frame this as well doesn’t it seem like a manufactured problem that we could solve by letting people make applications before they arrive here.
That’s just a quick example, but the gist has been really to be fucking relentless and not let anything slide without being challenged. After a while you’ll notice these people first come to you for an opinion, which id argue is thinking critically. Then you’ll see them thinking about things themselves rather than asking me.
Now I say be relentless, but you have to read the room and let things slide sometimes otherwise you’ll become insufferable and might hurt the cause, but I’ve found that once you can show some inconsistencies in the right wing rhetoric they’ll be more receptive to learning more and more.
No excuses anymore. They all have access to the same information we all do. They CHOOSE to ignore to not look anything up. Its not about being ‘critically.online’ cringe, its about being able to think critically and not believing eveeything you see on the internet. No excuses for stupidity anymore.