I mean, that works too sometimes. I think you should work in a few lines about how people are waking up, our numbers are growing, how people's eyes are opening, how minds are turning to us while you do it though.
All this shit produces the feeling of collective affirmation, and that feeling becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as the snowball starts to roll. People get pulled towards things that they feel like lots of other people are also being pulled to. It produces a kind of movement magnetism.
The lefts problem is what the right is very good at. Getting past the fact that people are not perfect. That they need molding. And that you got to just let some things slide to a point. And welcome them in.
Once they are ingrained is when you start to actually form and solidify the boundaries.
Not in one interaction no. But your interaction with someone is not the only interaction that exists. Our interactions with people do not exist in a vacuum.
Take a step back and look at things more holistically. Sometimes the conversation you are having is a lost cause and it is literally impossible for you to win this person over because it is not happening under the right conditions, in the right mood, with the right circumstances, after wolf howled twice at the moon and a black cat crossed your path twice that day.
In these circumstances it is often obvious when you're not going to win this person over... What can you do instead? What you should be aiming for in those circumstances is setting up the next interaction this person has with a socialist to be circumstances that might bear more fruit for that socialist instead.
What does this mean? Sometimes a person NEEDS to have extremely negative interactions with socialists that they were unsatisfied with in order to interact with another socialist in a more good-faith manner. Sometimes a person needs to be upset about an interaction they had previously in order to have a friendlier and more open interaction with a different socialist -- I am almost certain you have heard this story told before, a story of "wow you're so much better to talk to, the last time I tried to speak to someone about this they just screamed at me". This is an exaggeration, the previous socialist didn't just scream at them, they set you up for success because their conversation was never going to be a success in the first place.
We aren't having individual interactions with people. We are interacting with people as a collective movement and there are going to be dozens if not hundreds of interactions people have with socialists. Pick and choose your strategy for the moment based on judgement.
Some people need the stick. Some people need the carrot. Sometimes you need to be the stick so the next person can offer the carrot.
That they need molding. And that you got to just let some things slide to a point. And welcome them in.
To an extent yes. But I think this can only happen in active struggle. At events, at protest, on the picket lines, at the bread line, the food bank, the soup line. I don't think you get far letting any significant :brainworms: in without action and struggle to form bonds that will rip those worms out.
This was something I started doing without even thinking about it, I just started being more and more open about politics whenever it was relevant and as I learned how to communicate my ideas and practiced and gained confidence I noticed people agreeing with me more and more, and that led me to be able to confidently assert that there is this sort of sea change occurring which in turn makes the arguments themselves more persuasive.
Also learning how to paraphrase really good hard hitting bits of theory in a way that the average person can grasp the core of the message with more modern phrasing and terminology is a big plus.
Certainly pointing out people in the present who are winning in the workplace or at whatever electoral level, etc, and why they are worth celebrating is important and using them to rally a winning spirit behind the ideas that back unionizing activities etc is important to be made lucid and relevant and a slice of good ol socialist pie to give people an appetite for it. Because the risk of being associated with real leftism is not inconsiderate
No no no
What we must continue to do is frantically yell at people for imagined slights and words not being perfectly spoken. It's clearly a winning strategy
I mean, that works too sometimes. I think you should work in a few lines about how people are waking up, our numbers are growing, how people's eyes are opening, how minds are turning to us while you do it though.
All this shit produces the feeling of collective affirmation, and that feeling becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy as the snowball starts to roll. People get pulled towards things that they feel like lots of other people are also being pulled to. It produces a kind of movement magnetism.
Talking down to people wins no one over.
The lefts problem is what the right is very good at. Getting past the fact that people are not perfect. That they need molding. And that you got to just let some things slide to a point. And welcome them in.
Once they are ingrained is when you start to actually form and solidify the boundaries.
Not in one interaction no. But your interaction with someone is not the only interaction that exists. Our interactions with people do not exist in a vacuum.
Take a step back and look at things more holistically. Sometimes the conversation you are having is a lost cause and it is literally impossible for you to win this person over because it is not happening under the right conditions, in the right mood, with the right circumstances, after wolf howled twice at the moon and a black cat crossed your path twice that day.
In these circumstances it is often obvious when you're not going to win this person over... What can you do instead? What you should be aiming for in those circumstances is setting up the next interaction this person has with a socialist to be circumstances that might bear more fruit for that socialist instead.
What does this mean? Sometimes a person NEEDS to have extremely negative interactions with socialists that they were unsatisfied with in order to interact with another socialist in a more good-faith manner. Sometimes a person needs to be upset about an interaction they had previously in order to have a friendlier and more open interaction with a different socialist -- I am almost certain you have heard this story told before, a story of "wow you're so much better to talk to, the last time I tried to speak to someone about this they just screamed at me". This is an exaggeration, the previous socialist didn't just scream at them, they set you up for success because their conversation was never going to be a success in the first place.
We aren't having individual interactions with people. We are interacting with people as a collective movement and there are going to be dozens if not hundreds of interactions people have with socialists. Pick and choose your strategy for the moment based on judgement.
Some people need the stick. Some people need the carrot. Sometimes you need to be the stick so the next person can offer the carrot.
To an extent yes. But I think this can only happen in active struggle. At events, at protest, on the picket lines, at the bread line, the food bank, the soup line. I don't think you get far letting any significant :brainworms: in without action and struggle to form bonds that will rip those worms out.
Say what you want.
But there's a reason the left is constantly at each other's throats.
This was something I started doing without even thinking about it, I just started being more and more open about politics whenever it was relevant and as I learned how to communicate my ideas and practiced and gained confidence I noticed people agreeing with me more and more, and that led me to be able to confidently assert that there is this sort of sea change occurring which in turn makes the arguments themselves more persuasive.
Also learning how to paraphrase really good hard hitting bits of theory in a way that the average person can grasp the core of the message with more modern phrasing and terminology is a big plus.
Certainly pointing out people in the present who are winning in the workplace or at whatever electoral level, etc, and why they are worth celebrating is important and using them to rally a winning spirit behind the ideas that back unionizing activities etc is important to be made lucid and relevant and a slice of good ol socialist pie to give people an appetite for it. Because the risk of being associated with real leftism is not inconsiderate