11/05/2004 12:43:00 PM|||Joe|||I've joked for several weeks now that the election of 2004 is (now was) a decision between two right-wing wackos. I was only half-joking. Tom Tomorrow says something something along these lines, and it got me thinking.

What I mean by saying they're both right-wing wackos is that in pandering to voters we've compromised too many of our beliefs. We've let conservatives frame the arguments, so that instead of attacking conservatives for trying to marginalize women, gays and racial and cultural minorities, John Kerry kind of played defense. I really think Kerry wanted to go after Bush on these things, but he thought it'd be political suicide.

What is the point of all this? Is it just to get into office? If that's all there is to it, it's easy. Just pick out easy targets for the population to hate and harp on that and you can win office. But if we want to do the right thing, then why would we soften our message?

Democrats should stand for what liberalism stands for: social and economic justice. There are plenty of Republicans that can be brought around if you approach them correctly. I haven't seen it happen fully too often. But it can be done.

Look at how Socrates did things. I used to think that the Socratic method was kind of underhanded, but the more I think about it, the more I think that it's the only way to really get people to recognize their own cognitive dissonance.

It takes a lot of patience. And you have to be able to control the flow of conversation while saying little. But it is a remarkable way to get people to understand the world and their own beliefs.

I guess what I'm advocating here is a two-pronged approach. The huge organizational activism has been incredibly effective. MoveOn, Air America, ACT, etc. need to continue their work. But the other prong needs to be low-level activism. Don't shy away from political discussion. You just have to be incredibly patient with people. You also can't rely on so-called “talking points”. Bald-faced assertions never convince anyone. They are just tools to keep people from getting shouted down, and it perpetuates the shouting.

Listen to what people say. Don't just label them religious nuts or war-mongers or whatever. Understand why they believe what they do, and if there is a contradiction there, get them to discover it. Don't just tell them—that's easily perceived as an attack. Again, ask questions. The goal is to reach some comprehension of truth. You might even be convinced by them on a few things.

Don't get me wrong—I'm guilty of a lot of this stuff. I get frustrated sometimes and raise my voice, etc. I especially go off when I'm surrounded by liberal friends—there's no one around to get their feelings hurt. But I'm trying to temper my passions. It's tough.|||109968741617693701|||Right-Wing Wackos