More specifically, this is about people bothsidesing the ongoing genocide that zionists are committing, but I titled it more generally because this is something that can be difficult to deal with in general.
In the past, I've tried to be diplomatic and meet people where they're at, slowly imparting information where I can and presenting my views where I feel able to. I rarely actually get worked up about these things in person and am generally able to go through it with people patiently, but this is something that is really pushing me to my limits.
I think what is most galling to me about it, that I find as a theme in liberal thinking and struggle to be patient with at times, is the arrogance of it. I put a lot of time into these things, time that they clearly haven't put in, only to have them speak to me about it as if their position is equal and worthy of listening to simply because it is theirs. As if we are exchanging views on our favorite TV show.
I will be plain too, in saying that, quite frankly, it hurts. On top of everything else, it hurts to see someone you love and trust be clinging to talking points that confuse, downplay, or otherwise misunderstand a horrifying ongoing genocide.
These are people who I know mean well because I've known them my whole life and I know what kind of compassion they have, which makes it all the more disturbing to see them speaking in such a way. It illustrates how critical and influential propaganda is. But knowing that doesn't inherently make me more effective at getting people to cross that threshold from "nice" liberal to person who understands the world as more than imperialist talking points.
Their worldview is unscientific. You just have to educate the people willing to be educated and hope their lessons come back to people like those in your family.
If you can't agree on the fundamentals, the higher level issues are going to be far too abstract. If compassion and being nice is where they start, you have to meet them there. to be compassionate and nice, an American, especially a liberal American, would have to refute death and killing of any sort. If they are "bothsidesing" the issue, that is consistent with their framework.
This same framework is being constantly reinforced through other family members, middle class liberals, liberal news outlets, government officials, think tanks, and active digital spaces.
Unless you can find someone in the bunch who understands colonialism and struggle/resistance against oppressors, you are only putting yourself on the offensive. Pushing back would just further reinforce their ideas.
Try what Kwame Ture said in response to someone who opposes violence here. Think about the situation. If the only way for a slave to free himself is to kill his master, what should the slave do? Watch part I and II of this speech and ask your family some open ended questions about the oppressed-oppressor relationship. See if you can get anyone to consider that Israel and Palestine are in no way on equal footing. Explain what relationship exists. Explain how oppressed people had to fight for their freedoms. Explain that some anti-colonial forces committed some atrocities while explaining how the relationship makes peace between oppressed and oppressor impossible. Explain how one needs to focus on the primary contradiction, that bringing up one or two atrocities is a tactic used to distract from the broader relationship and the broader moral and compassionate position of the resistance.
If you can't find a single person within the circle of any family member to get on board with this, you just need to move on to people willing to learn and willing to listen. Educate the others, maybe your family isn't primed to hear it yet.
I appreciate the thoughtful breakdown and analysis. After watching through that video and reflecting on this some, I'm thinking that I may be making continual mistakes of presentation. That I need to practice organizing my thoughts on these kind of matters, so that I'm prepared. In the recent instance, I did not expect it and found myself trying to explain reactively, which didn't go how I wanted it to.
In other words, I'm thinking I need to make a case for these kind of issues beforehand. Something that I can present simply. Then if they accept the basics of that case but reject it on ideological grounds, I can go through the kind of points you mention, which are also worth practicing.
I like to be adaptable to who I'm talking to, but that isn't a reason for me not to be prepared on the fundamentals.
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy: