Arguing Politics and Confrontation Issues
Apr. 15th, 2020 03:59 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
unspeakablehorror Arguing for positions always requires confrontation, even if it's only the knowledge that people you know who read the argument might be confronted with things they don't agree with. And it is certainly the case that that would not usually be the only kind of confrontation involved. I know from watching anyone who argues any kind of position passionately that there will always be people who vocally object, often in incredibly frustrating ways. And I've seen that that's exhausting and often a source of burnout in so many people.
Therefore in order to argue for the things I believe in, I have to be able to emotionally deal with confrontation. I think it's always best to avoid unnecessary confrontation and to avoid unnecessary escalation of antagonism. However, there's a certain point after which that becomes a willingness to compromise away all of one's own morals for the sake of someone else's comfort and the imaginary dream that if one simply makes one's political opponents feel comfortable doing what they have been doing all along that this will somehow incentivize them to change. And when such arguments are over core political issues, and countless lives are on the line, such behavior does unimaginable harm. Even when the issue is not directly lives, but simply seeing the disadvantaged and oppressed as worthy of credibility and autonomy and respect, the willingness to cede those positions to someone so as not to make them uncomfortable, or to make oneself more comfortable, is making oneself complicit in the denial of those things.
My current solution to this is simply to try to avoid bringing up such disagreements whenever possible so I neither have to deal with the conflict of arguing for them or feel pressured to say something conciliatory that causes such harm (though oftentimes it's simply because I know I wouldn't be able to force that kind of response out of me and that 'politeness' dictates such grovelling is the only response that wouldn't be met with derision). But of course this just makes me a coward who's not really addressing the issue at all.
I also want to make clear, I don't need anyone to try to make me feel better about this! But if you have any suggestions for better dealing with these confrontation issues or actually articulating my arguments, then suggest away. This is a real problem I have and I want to get better about it. Anyway, while I of course do feel guilty about things I feel I've done wrong, I don't have a strong tendency towards guilt spirals, and in fact I've long suspected that I don't process guilt in a normal way at all because I don't seem to respond to social shaming the way a lot of people self-report that they do. Which is to say, if I think a lot of people think I am a bad or evil person, it makes me feel unsafe, but I don't really tend to internalize those beliefs if they are not compatible with my own.
Therefore in order to argue for the things I believe in, I have to be able to emotionally deal with confrontation. I think it's always best to avoid unnecessary confrontation and to avoid unnecessary escalation of antagonism. However, there's a certain point after which that becomes a willingness to compromise away all of one's own morals for the sake of someone else's comfort and the imaginary dream that if one simply makes one's political opponents feel comfortable doing what they have been doing all along that this will somehow incentivize them to change. And when such arguments are over core political issues, and countless lives are on the line, such behavior does unimaginable harm. Even when the issue is not directly lives, but simply seeing the disadvantaged and oppressed as worthy of credibility and autonomy and respect, the willingness to cede those positions to someone so as not to make them uncomfortable, or to make oneself more comfortable, is making oneself complicit in the denial of those things.
My current solution to this is simply to try to avoid bringing up such disagreements whenever possible so I neither have to deal with the conflict of arguing for them or feel pressured to say something conciliatory that causes such harm (though oftentimes it's simply because I know I wouldn't be able to force that kind of response out of me and that 'politeness' dictates such grovelling is the only response that wouldn't be met with derision). But of course this just makes me a coward who's not really addressing the issue at all.
I also want to make clear, I don't need anyone to try to make me feel better about this! But if you have any suggestions for better dealing with these confrontation issues or actually articulating my arguments, then suggest away. This is a real problem I have and I want to get better about it. Anyway, while I of course do feel guilty about things I feel I've done wrong, I don't have a strong tendency towards guilt spirals, and in fact I've long suspected that I don't process guilt in a normal way at all because I don't seem to respond to social shaming the way a lot of people self-report that they do. Which is to say, if I think a lot of people think I am a bad or evil person, it makes me feel unsafe, but I don't really tend to internalize those beliefs if they are not compatible with my own.