5 ms·

This is pretty much the playbook I tried with my father last night, to no avail. You see, it’s not about rational arguments - and if you try to fight it on tho

This is pretty much the playbook I tried with my father last night, to no avail. You see, it’s not about rational arguments - and if you try to fight it on those grounds, you’ll have Brexit all over your hands, and it’s a nightmare to clean up. No - last night I explained how the proposed legislation would directly hurt him, how it would take away freedoms he currently enjoys. Everything looped back to “but Obama crippled the internet in 2015” and “but I want internet freedom”. When those didn’t fit, it turned into generational crap. “My generation invented the internet. Yours just uses it for smartphones and twitter and facebook. We wouldn’t even be having this argument if it weren’t for millennials messing up the internet.” He’s not stupid - he’s just suspending the rational thought he’s amply capable of in favour of comforting lies. No, he’s broken, without hope. The content, the detail, the logic, the impact - all irrelevant. What is relevant is picking at the feeling of trapped failure that pervades much of society, and providing the population with a facile solution to their complex problems. “Vote for internet freedom, imagine the flag flying in the breeze against a clear blue sky and an eagle flies by, just like the good old days, when pop would put you on his shoulders to see the marching band”. Problem is, when you try to argue either the immediate argument or the broader emotional trap they’re in, they dig in deeper - nobody wants to be the fool who fell in a trap. It’s very nearly if not actually checkmate politics - I cannot see an out that doesn’t require going through hell, and I’ll be delightfully surprised if this doesn’t pass into law with roaring popular support.

iovrthoughtthis 9y ago
He's not broken. Something about your argument tugs at the very foundation of his identity. By attacking something so close (what ever it is) to his identity he percieves it as personal. Food for thought
- pjc50 9y ago
  Would that identity be "I'm right all the time regardless of the actual facts"? I see that a lot :(
  - iovrthoughtthis 9y ago
    It could be! Especially as the child. The whole Protective Parent vision of oneself may well exist. Accepting the child being right would damage that.
miguelrochefort 9y ago
You want more government. We don't. Get over it.
- masklinn 9y ago
  Now what are you talking about? The only thing TFA wants, assuming they favor Title II classification for ISPs, is what the FCC has been doing since 2010: * that ISPs do not discriminate in transmitting lawful network traffic * that ISPs do not block lawful "content, applications, services or non-harmful devices" You're not "[not] want[ing] more government", you're wanting consumer-facing ISP control and monopolistic renting over all content.
  - en-us 9y ago
    For anyone interested, this is here, section III A: https://www.google.com/url?q=https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-15-24A1.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiKz8bHguzXAhVh4oMKHRSPDzkQFggLMAA&usg=AOvVaw1C-OuAir8QJb-zpfxl1lKv https://www.google.com/url?q=https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_publ...
- EliRivers 9y ago
  There size of the government won't change. So this argument must be shorthand for something else? What is that something else?
thechao 9y ago
I’ve convinced several die-hard no-global-warming enthusiasts that not only is there global warming, but that’s it anthropogenically caused. All such discussions start by listening. What you need to do is engage your father’s critical thinking by having him clearly articulate all of his ideas & logical deductions—and not arguing, or even discussing your opinion! Normally, people hold opinions rooted emotionally. Once you have them clearly think about what they’re feeling, you can then discover how to address their logic. As a good way to practice this: there are actually a number great arguments for why the FCC shouldn’t be involved in regulating the internet. Discover these arguments & convince yourself they’re correct. Once you can do that, figure out why you think FCC regulation is better than those methods. Then, figure what you’re father’s argument is, and show him why FCC regulation is better than the alternative.

iovrthoughtthis 9y ago

He's not broken. Something about your argument tugs at the very foundation of his identity. By attacking something so close (what ever it is) to his identity he percieves it as personal. Food for thought

pjc50 9y ago
Would that identity be "I'm right all the time regardless of the actual facts"? I see that a lot :(
- iovrthoughtthis 9y ago
  It could be! Especially as the child. The whole Protective Parent vision of oneself may well exist. Accepting the child being right would damage that.

miguelrochefort 9y ago

You want more government. We don't. Get over it.

masklinn 9y ago
Now what are you talking about? The only thing TFA wants, assuming they favor Title II classification for ISPs, is what the FCC has been doing since 2010: * that ISPs do not discriminate in transmitting lawful network traffic * that ISPs do not block lawful "content, applications, services or non-harmful devices" You're not "[not] want[ing] more government", you're wanting consumer-facing ISP control and monopolistic renting over all content.
- en-us 9y ago
  For anyone interested, this is here, section III A: https://www.google.com/url?q=https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-15-24A1.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwiKz8bHguzXAhVh4oMKHRSPDzkQFggLMAA&usg=AOvVaw1C-OuAir8QJb-zpfxl1lKv https://www.google.com/url?q=https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_publ...
EliRivers 9y ago
There size of the government won't change. So this argument must be shorthand for something else? What is that something else?

thechao 9y ago

I’ve convinced several die-hard no-global-warming enthusiasts that not only is there global warming, but that’s it anthropogenically caused. All such discussions start by listening. What you need to do is engage your father’s critical thinking by having him clearly articulate all of his ideas & logical deductions—and not arguing, or even discussing your opinion! Normally, people hold opinions rooted emotionally. Once you have them clearly think about what they’re feeling, you can then discover how to address their logic. As a good way to practice this: there are actually a number great arguments for why the FCC shouldn’t be involved in regulating the internet. Discover these arguments & convince yourself they’re correct. Once you can do that, figure out why you think FCC regulation is better than those methods. Then, figure what you’re father’s argument is, and show him why FCC regulation is better than the alternative.