You must log in or register to comment.
™
This comic illustrates my internal struggle to get along with my trump bootlicker coworkers.
I have to schmooze a little bit to keep the working relationship running, but I feel disgusted every single day when the little hints of what they stand for peek out.
So I’m going to share something agent_nycto said once, because it works very well on people like this:
I don’t think you should be quiet, it makes them feel like everyone is agreeing with them and makes everyone miserable. Time to introduce you to my favorite game to play with conservatives, Politics Judo!
So you hear them rant about a thing. Some dumbass talking point. Let’s use gun control. It’s pretty easy to know in advance what the talking points are since they never shut up and parrot the same problem and solution over and over. “Shouldn’t take guns, it’s a mental problem not a gun problem”.
Things are basically boiled down to a problem and a solution. A lot of people try to convince people that the problem isn’t what people think it is, and that’s hard to do. Even if they are just misinformed, it feels like trying to dismiss their fears.
So what you do is you agree with the problem, then use lefty talking points as the solution.
“Oh yeah, gun violence is pretty bad! And I love the Constitution, we shouldn’t mess with that!” (Use small words and also throw in some patriotism, makes them feel like you’re on their side. You want to sound like a right wing media con artist) “so instead of taking guns away, we should instead start having more, free, mental health care in this country. Since it’s a mental health problem and these people are crazy, that is the solution that makes the most sense!” (Don’t try to get them to agree to your solution, just state it as the obvious one)
It becomes weaponized cognitive dissonance. Their brains fry because you said the things you should to agree with them, flagged yourself as an ally, but then said the thing they were told is the bad and shouldn’t want.
If they try to argue with your solution, rinse and repeat to a different talking point. “Oh yeah it might cost more, and we shouldn’t have to pay more for it, so we should get the rich people who are screwing average hard working Americans over by not paying taxes to do that. We should shut down tax loopholes and increase funding to the IRS so they can go after them instead of the little guy”
Always sound like you’re agreeing with them, but giving solutions that they disagree with that seem to be off topic but are related.
Either they will get flustered and stop, or they will slip up and say something racist or sexist or something, and then you can have HR bust them. Document it and also see if you’re in a single party consent state.
The “yes and” method.
It starts with “I’m married to a Democrat, so I’m reasonable” but then “sorry guys let me get my dog’s shock collar, she’s eating the cat food again”. Funny how over half of my Republican coworkers shock their dogs and hit their kids in the past, literally don’t think there’s anything wrong with it.
100% but we both know that if these people aren’t dealt with, the world is only going to get worse.
Try seemingly open-minded questions about what they think. Gently introducing questioning will avoiding confrontation can work to shake their beliefs. It can be satisfying to see them become more nuanced as they try to explain.
They just bring up information as fact that they’ve put no research into demonstrating.
“oh well that’s just not what I believe” -anything against their alternative facts
Just gently question those: oh, why do you think this? What do you think of those people who have another opinion? Keep pulling on whatever they give.
No. That’s a poor way to do it. They have very clear ideas on why things are like they are, and for the basis of their racism… they’re wrong ideas, but they’re extremely clear. Arguing without the understanding that they have alternatives facts is wrong
Why would you think it’s without knowing they got intoxicated by fake news?
That’s the point, you think they have wrong ideas, so you push them gently to increase the chance that they will question them by themselves.
If that’s a poor way to do it, maybe you have a better way, what is it?Why would you think it’s without knowing they got intoxicated by fake news?
I really can’t make heads or tails of this sentence.
That’s the point, you think they have wrong ideas, so you push them gently to increase the chance that they will question them by themselves.
I don’t disagree with gentle pushing. I’m saying what your idea is not going to push them at all, nor will it be taken as gentle. Honestly, it makes me wonder if you’ve actually interacted with these sorts.
The best approach that I’ve found is to beat them to the punch of saying things. Basically, make points before they can say stipid shit, they’re very easily manipulated if they haven’t already taken a stance in the conversation
Also going into the points they aren’t as sure on, proving them wrong, has given me a great basis of getting them to admit they’re wrong. It’s all in tone of voice. Not being a dick about it.
You said this:
Arguing without the understanding that they have alternatives facts is wrong
I’m asking you why would you think that is not already integrated in my way, since I think it is implied by what I explained.
Honestly, it makes me wonder if you’ve actually interacted with these sorts.
Not the MAGA people since I don’t live in the USA, but French conservatives, mostly through the diversity of background that exists in sports activities.
The best approach that I’ve found is to beat them to the punch of saying things. Basically, make points before they can say stipid shit, they’re very easily manipulated if they haven’t already taken a stance in the conversation
I think this could work, but it limits the number of opportunities quite a lot. I see no reason to not try both.
To get along with humans.
There I fixed it. 😁
fascists are pretty wicked humans, and it gets hard to keep friendly relations with if you have a functioning moral compass.
I appreciate the answer and yes, I know and wholeheartedly agree with the comic!
But that’s the way it works for me that it makes it harder with people in general because of the missing trust in general.
That’s where my post came from.
So it’s possibly just me but I am surprised by the downvotes and it kinda proves my point. 😔
i think it just means rebuilding trust is gonna be hard. part of the owner class strategy has always been to divide us.
i had a coworker who simped for trump and musk. we are not even from the us.
oh he also bragged he and part of his family estranged some close gay relative of his that really needed a lot of help from them once.
very in favor of the war on drugs, hated weed and stuff, but did some dangerous pharmaceuticals he acquired somehow.
had the grindset mentality that i can see could potentially bring him to collapse, on a place that already overworked its employees.
barely slept and used said meds to work harder. theres probably more.
he was nice though. said his pleases and thank yous, had his coworkers back. he was relied upon because he knew his shit (but it probably cost a piece of himself)
i dont understand these people at all or why we normalized this… strangeness? i honestly can’t explain the surrealism. believe it or not that was tame for that workplace.
The guy excusing it is almost just as problematic. Just because you can act polite doesnt mean youre nice, but espousing these views isnt even polite. Having to pretend to get along with people like this at work is soul draining.
That’s the joke and it’s good you picked up on it.
People need to face the consequences of their beliefs within the circle of their loved ones. If that fails, the next social circle upwards like their friends. But right now it feels like even that has failed and now people are okay with letting awful beliefs fester in their neighbors because it’s “politics”. That’s not okay, as this comic relies on.
Wouldn’t mind be given away as a husband by the state. You can also have my vote. Doesn’t seem to count for much anyways.
You know women can be shitty partners too right? Not just men?
If I don’t trust my parents to vet potential partners, no way am I trusting the state for such a life impacting decision.
Oh I’m sure. Asshollery isn’t confined to a single gender.
I was joking anyway. I don’t want to get married any time soon.
Yeah, and some of them are ugly.
I don’t have much to do with these types so then I see something like given a wife by the state and im like. WTF!
That’s an extra weird one because usually I thought these dudes were all about a return to a mythical time when according to them, everything was great until things like women having rights ruined it all. But when has the state ever given people a wife? Even when women were considered property it didn’t work like that. You always previously had to demonstrate at least some semblance of appeal even in paternalistic societies with arranged marriages since even then the parents at least needed to be persuaded this was a good idea.
They actually somehow managed to dream up a dystopian system even worse than “the good old days”.
Handmaid’s Tale. They’re literally using it as a checklist of things to aim for.
What makes you think there are people like that? A comic?
There are a few in this thread it looks like.
For some reason, I immediately assumed they were talking about Eric S. Raymond
The worst kind of person isn’t someone who will defend free speech, it’s someone who does so at first, and then stops defending it when they’re in power.
I think hate speech should have repercussions, but there are lots of thoughts that are hard to explain. A big problem is the upsurge in these types of comics. I think they are not only unhelpful, but detrimental to the cause at hand when pro-Palestine protesters are being labeled “Nazis” and then detained. The problem right now clearly is the state, not the people living under the state, and someone saying a few offensive things, while evil, isn’t as bad as the government being turned into a police state before our eyes, who will gladly shut us up for protesting against them. Stop worrying about the Nazis in universities and start worrying about Nazis about to run the U.S. military.
Did you comment on the wrong post?
I really hope so, for their sake.
No… I think they’re saying that the comic guy who thinks women shouldn’t vote is not as bad as the people in Trump’s cabinet, or something. Which is like… I can care about both pretty easily. Effortlessly, even.
There’s a very strong trend on Lemmy I’ve found that really supports the whole women not having rights concept. They just come out of Woodworks.
I like this as a thought experiment: Lemmy, at what point does someone stop being nice? And is there a difference between acting or being nice?
Raymond is probably “nice” to the fellow white dude, polite and not physically aggressive.
Raymond is not nice to society.
That’s an interesting point. People can be nice to certain groups of people I guess. Maybe no one can be nice to everyone.
Nothing new here, who doesn’t know someone who is very pleasant on the surface and a complete sociopath underneath?
I kniw that probably you didn’t mean it that way, but it sounds as though you’re excusing Raymond.
Could even be nice to the marginalized they know and deem “one of the good ones” but still vote violence against them and be racist pieces of shit.
I know people in this exact scenario, in fact.
Of the people I’ve encountered this is the more realistic portrayal of a racist. Granted, I’m white so have a hard time detecting when other whites are racist, but when they are it’s always in the more subtle ways of upholding and defending toxic hierarchies.
I’m sure there are plenty of people who will outwardly rant and rave, but I feel like those people lack the social power to be a real threat (though their lack the self control might make them a more immediate physical threat) .
I know people like this. They’re “nic”. But what that means is they put everyone they know into “one of the good ones” box. So they’re polite to all people they know, basically… It’s interesting and horrifying to see tbh
With enough self reflection, that can turn around into changing their opinion at a systemic level. Sometimes all it takes is few comments from someone they trust, and some time to process.
It’s like when people romanticise the old London gangsters and say they were polite and always looked after their mother. That still doesn’t make up for a lifetime of criminal intimidation, physical assault and murder.
If someone’s polite but just waiting for a local chapter of blackshirts to form they’re not nice people.
“Niceness” is largely performative. It’s based on words and little else. Being “nice” is based on how someone views themself.
Kindness, on the other hand, is rooted in an intrinsic belief that is shown through action. It extends beyond the individual and considers how their actions relate to society as a whole.
You can paint a layer of “nice” over an absolute garbage core personality. It doesn’t really mean anything. These days, “nice” can be used to describe a baseline level of standard civility that allows you to function in society. It says nothing about what kind of person you are.
I’m going to preface this statement by saying you don’t need to be a believer or religious to benefit from religious things, or musings of religious people. Your questions relate to philosophy, morality, virtue. These are things religions have pondered for centuries. Millenia. Perhaps we should at least consider what they have to say. I’m also going to preface this with…I think I misinterpreted your first question. But I like what I whipped up & I think you will, too, so I’m keeping it. 🙂
Pope Saint John Paul II once said, “freedom consists not in doing what we like, but in having the right to do what we ought.” Now I really like this definition because it implies that real, lasting, quality freedom of the individual still comes with some responsibilities & even obligations. In the same way “being nice” is multi-faceted, it’s got layers to it, it’s using your freedom, abilities, powers, & assets to do good things for others. To build others up.
Now on to what I think your questions are, but I’m going to answer in reverse because I think it flows better in convo: there are absolutely huge differences between acting nice & actually being nice. A big one is motivation. Are you nice to help others? Or are you being nice in a bid to gain favor, look good, or get something for yourself? Are you altruistic & trying to help others? Or are you just in it for yourself? In Rick & Morty, I liked the wedding toast where Rick says being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets. Some people are nice just to help themselves.
We all have an opportunity to become better, or “be good”, and it doesn’t have to be anything earth-shattering. It’s the cumulative effect of making good choices, the right choices, every single day when we’re presented with the opportunity. Will Durant, when summarizing Aristotle’s philosophy, remarked, “We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act, but a habit.”
It’s hard to define “a point where someone stops being nice”; I don’t view humans as one-dimensional. It’s got to exist somewhere. I go back to a person’s focus & intention, some people are “not nice” on purpose & then I’m sure there are lots of people with glaring character flaws, who are themselves unaware and/or they don’t personally view those characteristics as flaws. “Being nice”, itself, is open to interpretation. Personally, I would define being nice (to others) as seeking out & prioritizing their needs, especially without obligation or compulsion. Maybe a person stops being nice when the bad is significant, or outweighs the good. Honestly this probably plays like the guy presented in comic, but I think different people can have different relationships with the same person. There’s a difference between a man & his boss, a man & his guy friends, a man & his wife, a man & his children, a man & idk people he doesn’t like. It’s the same guy. I think how a man treats somebody he owes nothing to says a lot about “niceness” & character.
Imo nice and kind are separate qualities, mutually exclusive. Raymond is unkind towards women, but he may have a nice demeanor. Lots of evil people can be nice around others in chit chat, but cruel in their actions and beliefs.
This is the entire concept of the gentlemen thief. Being polite, nice and honest in way stops someone from being an awful, terrible person who would gladly steal everything you own and leave you for dead.
People seem to struggle massively with the idea that others can be complex and multifaceted. Everyone whos “nice” must be good or everyone whos “mean” must be evil. Relly is just fundamentally flawed.
Everytime i see a comment saying they are confused over this it makes me feel like people just fundamentally do not understand the concepts of nuance or really other humans in general.
This is an interesting question. Given a sufficiently functional environment “Raymond” may be functionally harmless as its impossible to for him to have anything crazy he wants. In a functional enough one he wont even admit the crazy shit he believes because it would see him excluded and possibly fired.
Do we then consider him eccentric instead of a POS? Is a sex murder a “nice” if he’s behind bars and we only talk to him about normal stuff and forget that he would gladly rape and murder you without the bars?
At some point we need to understand that someone who would take away your rights and potentially kill you if you didn’t roll over and accept his dominion isn’t “nice” just because he exists in an environment where he isn’t in a position to work his will.
Good point. There’s plenty of examples (fictional or not) where ‘nice’ people were driven to ‘not nice’ things and vice versa. The fact we need laws indicate that maybe mostly people are maybe not nice? Since if we’d be considerate we wouldn’t need those laws (in general)? It seems most people seem to think ‘being nice’ is doing things the majority of people deem as a good thing to do.
You can believe really stupid shit, but still be a nice person, so that question probably has a grey zone that would be hard to qualify, withe several “dealbreakers” in there. Like, you can’t be a nice person if you want to own slaves.
Rofl the polite misogynist. The worst
Tips fedora
M’property
I also don’t think that men should be given a wife by the state though…
Robot wife though? I might consider.
Robot life partner for everyone? Absolutely.
What you guys don’t have phones? Tsk
Well, two wives just seems excessive
We could really use someone who’s competent around the household. Would also take a husband and anything in between.
Ok, how about we do it like I used to play the sims in 2000.
Every house has 5 workers, and 3 stay at home people. One of the stay at home people is a cook mostly. Won’t burn the house down. And can then practice other skills. While people are at work.
The second stay at home person is similar, but instead of cooking, this person is a handyman.
The third stay at home person is actually a rotating spot. Why? Because this person just stays home all day every day and increases their skills. All the skills. Then when thats done, they go back into the work force, and we pull another person OUT of the workforce to enter that 3rd slot.
Eventually all 6 of the non-permanent stay at homers will have a full set of skills.
And the two stay at home people will cook, and maintain the house, while socializing. This ensures the house has family friends. Because you know your boss won’t give you a raise until you have 4 family friends.
And the 6 workers will all have high paying jobs. Which means they can afford a maid, and a gardener.
I’m a software engineer, I think I can be one of the 5 workers straight off the bat. Let’s find 6 more people and we can have this eightsome working!
Count me in, also a software developer, and a really good cook so I can fill if I need to
Has the handyman slot been filled yet? This sounds like a great setup.
My friend’s wife said they need to get “a bitch”. Someone who does the tradwife things while both of them can do things they enjoy in life.
This was of course said in a joking tone, they’re both very progressive people, and generally share the workload at home. Gender of said bitch wasn’t specified either. Just saying this before anyone thinks my friends are horrible people lol
Whenever anyone says someone is nice, I internally translate it as them saying, someone is polite. Still a douche but a polite douche.
I haven’t found a Raymond in Cascadia
This comic looks like it was drawn by a generation that’s “expiring”
Uh, this sexist “cartoonist” again. Let’s just hate each other, shall we?
Nah, Raymond’s a cunt and I’ve told a few Raymonds at work that.
I think I work with Raymond. He refuses to say women’s and men’s restroom. He only says female and male.
