• Obinice@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    79
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 days ago

    Missing the decades in which they tried persuading, debating, discussing and educating up to this tipping point, this final straw, all to no avail.

    Are we supposed to just keep trying forever, pointlessly? Exhaustingly? Every day? For another 30 years?

    At some point for our own mental wellbeing it’s time to consider that some people will simply never change, are closed to any and all discussions, and it’s best for ourselves to stop trying over and over, and focus on our own mental health instead.

    I was idealistic once, and would have said there’s never a time to stop trying to fix other people, to help them see a different viewpoint, or mortality, etc, but some people just can’t be fixed. All you’re really doing by continuing to try is breaking yourself in the process. Be kind to yourself <3

    • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      15 days ago

      I’m always gonna try to persuade others to be kinder and more responsible, but I don’t bother with people who A: have chosen to ignore future arguments, B: hurt those who try to persuade them. I’ll keep talking to any absolute shithead who actively listens and doesn’t attack Me.

        • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          15 days ago

          there is no “persuade” with people who have chosen to discard reality in favor of the completely insane fantasy land of the cult hive maga mind.

          What about people who have chosen to discard reality in favour of nice things like fairness, justice, and the power to improve the world?

                • Grail@multiverse.soulism.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  15 days ago

                  Falseness can be determined in an antirealist ontology in two ways: hypocrisy, and ethical consequences. For example, if someone claims a belief in science, but thinks climate change is a hoax, that’s hypocrisy. We can point out that science says climate change is happening. And if someone claims to value kindness, but misgenders trans people, we can point at the dysphoria caused by the actions.

                  Now, these two tactics won’t work on people who don’t mind being hypocrites and don’t care about ethics. Namely, fascists. We deal with fascists using violence. This includes “soft” violence like denying them freedoms, and hard violence like physically or emotionally harming them. If everyone agrees not to be friends with nazis, then nazis are gonna be lonely and maybe they’ll stop being nazis in order to gain friends again. If that doesn’t work, we can throw soy milkshakes at them. If that doesn’t work, we can put them in a room where they can’t hurt anyone and make them see a therapist. And if that doesn’t work, we can shoot them with a tank.

                  If someone has the entirely self-consistent ideological view that putting Jewish people in gas chambers is an axiomatic good, then I am willing to commit acts of violence within the bounds of the Geneva conventions to enforce My subjective belief that putting Jewish people in gas chambers is bad. That action doesn’t require realism, it just requires that I be strongly committed to subjective principles.