6 ms·

Eh, honestly be grateful there are people that want to talk to you. Learn some basic assertiveness if such friendly interactions are excruciating for you.

lsc 16y ago
it's easier for some people than for others. Especially for introverts, the skill of leaving gracefully is a non-trivial skill that needs to be learned. I mean, most people are capable of saying "fuck you leave me alone you asshole" but usually, you don't want to come off that strong. In most cases, you don't really have any desire to hurt the other person, and hell, you might even want to talk later, or talk about a different subject. I just want to be very clear that I am not interested in hearing about how all 50 presidents can be traced back to some 13th century English aristocrat, or hearing about some other crazy political idea or theory that doesn't lead to something implementable. It's the ability to make it clear that you aren't interested in this conversation right now without sounding like you aren't interested in talking with this person ever that is the tricky bit for those of us who are not particularly skilled. I used to be really, really bad at this. I'm getting better, but I still use crutches and props like my laptop or cellphone, or simply making up something I've gotta do. (well, really, there's /always/ something useful I could be doing, but if I'm at my local hackerspace, if someone wants to talk politics, I'm far more likely to actually start working as an excuse to avoid the conversation.) Part of it is being willing to be a little rude... but like I said, the hard part about that isn't so much the being rude, the hard part is being "a little" rude - enough to get the desired result without completely alienating the other person. This, I think, is what the author of the article was mentioning. In the introduction, he says "You need to find a way to end the conversation without making it seem like you want the conversation to end." - which is wrong, I think. My opinion is that you should find a way to indicate that you wish to end this conversation without indicating that you don't like or never want to talk to this person again.
- loewenskind 16y ago
  I don't get why "talking politics" is something to so desperately avoid in the US. Many intelligent people just wont talk about leaving mostly the close minded life long party members to be the only voices. Personally I think this is why the political landscape is so awful in the US.
  - philwelch 16y ago
    Hi, I'm an intelligent American who occasionally tries talking about politics. Many otherwise intelligent Americans are monomaniacal nutjobs or partisan hacks when it comes to politics. Of course, many Americans who are not otherwise intelligent are just as bad. People get indoctrinated in a certain political viewpoint and don't have the ability to take on good faith anyone who disagrees with them. As a result of this, it's so difficult to find someone capable of intelligently and thoughtfully discussing political issues that it's rarely worth it.
    - hugh3 16y ago
      Even if you do happen to get two people in a conversation who disagree politically and are capable of thoughtfully and intelligently discussing political issues, it's so much effort to do so that it's usually not a fun conversation unless you're already good friends with the person in question. Discussing politics with people you've just met, or people with whom you're only vaguely acquainted, is a recipe for disaster. Worst of all is when you're in a group of people who think they're all in political agreement, but you disagree with all of them. (As a right-of-centre academic, this happens surprisingly often.) They're saying something which you not only disagree with, but which is factually false in some detail. Do you speak up and risk alienating everybody, or bite your tongue and suffer through it? (Or do you pretend you need to go to the bathroom and hope the subject has changed when you come back? That's what I tend to do...)
      - philwelch 16y ago
        Worst of all is when you're in a group of people who think they're all in political agreement, but you disagree with all of them. (As a right-of-centre academic, this happens surprisingly often.) I can't abide that, and usually speak up just to break the illusion that everyone agrees. Of course, frank discussions of real politics are probably a career-limiting move in faculty politics....
    - loewenskind 16y ago
      If they really are as intelligent as you/they think then try pointing out to them their close mindedness [1]. I used to be firmly on the American right wing (i.e. didn't think other ideologies had much merit, if any) until I came to Europe and realized my views simply could not be reconciled with countries like e.g. Sweden doing just fine. You can't discount something that works. As a programmer, I know that "works" doesn't mean that something is the best way or is even good at all, but it at least can't be discounted out of hand. I wish there were a way to e.g. make pg's "how to disagree" required reading for anyone wishing to participate in political discussions (and vote for that matter). [1] "Close minded" is often used as a kind of weapon by people unable to argue their point, but I use it to mean "unwilling to reconsider their position even when it's demonstrated to be untrue or at least incomplete".

lsc 16y ago

it's easier for some people than for others. Especially for introverts, the skill of leaving gracefully is a non-trivial skill that needs to be learned. I mean, most people are capable of saying "fuck you leave me alone you asshole" but usually, you don't want to come off that strong. In most cases, you don't really have any desire to hurt the other person, and hell, you might even want to talk later, or talk about a different subject. I just want to be very clear that I am not interested in hearing about how all 50 presidents can be traced back to some 13th century English aristocrat, or hearing about some other crazy political idea or theory that doesn't lead to something implementable. It's the ability to make it clear that you aren't interested in this conversation right now without sounding like you aren't interested in talking with this person ever that is the tricky bit for those of us who are not particularly skilled. I used to be really, really bad at this. I'm getting better, but I still use crutches and props like my laptop or cellphone, or simply making up something I've gotta do. (well, really, there's /always/ something useful I could be doing, but if I'm at my local hackerspace, if someone wants to talk politics, I'm far more likely to actually start working as an excuse to avoid the conversation.) Part of it is being willing to be a little rude... but like I said, the hard part about that isn't so much the being rude, the hard part is being "a little" rude - enough to get the desired result without completely alienating the other person. This, I think, is what the author of the article was mentioning. In the introduction, he says "You need to find a way to end the conversation without making it seem like you want the conversation to end." - which is wrong, I think. My opinion is that you should find a way to indicate that you wish to end this conversation without indicating that you don't like or never want to talk to this person again.

loewenskind 16y ago
I don't get why "talking politics" is something to so desperately avoid in the US. Many intelligent people just wont talk about leaving mostly the close minded life long party members to be the only voices. Personally I think this is why the political landscape is so awful in the US.
- philwelch 16y ago
  Hi, I'm an intelligent American who occasionally tries talking about politics. Many otherwise intelligent Americans are monomaniacal nutjobs or partisan hacks when it comes to politics. Of course, many Americans who are not otherwise intelligent are just as bad. People get indoctrinated in a certain political viewpoint and don't have the ability to take on good faith anyone who disagrees with them. As a result of this, it's so difficult to find someone capable of intelligently and thoughtfully discussing political issues that it's rarely worth it.
  - hugh3 16y ago
    Even if you do happen to get two people in a conversation who disagree politically and are capable of thoughtfully and intelligently discussing political issues, it's so much effort to do so that it's usually not a fun conversation unless you're already good friends with the person in question. Discussing politics with people you've just met, or people with whom you're only vaguely acquainted, is a recipe for disaster. Worst of all is when you're in a group of people who think they're all in political agreement, but you disagree with all of them. (As a right-of-centre academic, this happens surprisingly often.) They're saying something which you not only disagree with, but which is factually false in some detail. Do you speak up and risk alienating everybody, or bite your tongue and suffer through it? (Or do you pretend you need to go to the bathroom and hope the subject has changed when you come back? That's what I tend to do...)
    - philwelch 16y ago
      Worst of all is when you're in a group of people who think they're all in political agreement, but you disagree with all of them. (As a right-of-centre academic, this happens surprisingly often.) I can't abide that, and usually speak up just to break the illusion that everyone agrees. Of course, frank discussions of real politics are probably a career-limiting move in faculty politics....
  - loewenskind 16y ago
    If they really are as intelligent as you/they think then try pointing out to them their close mindedness [1]. I used to be firmly on the American right wing (i.e. didn't think other ideologies had much merit, if any) until I came to Europe and realized my views simply could not be reconciled with countries like e.g. Sweden doing just fine. You can't discount something that works. As a programmer, I know that "works" doesn't mean that something is the best way or is even good at all, but it at least can't be discounted out of hand. I wish there were a way to e.g. make pg's "how to disagree" required reading for anyone wishing to participate in political discussions (and vote for that matter). [1] "Close minded" is often used as a kind of weapon by people unable to argue their point, but I use it to mean "unwilling to reconsider their position even when it's demonstrated to be untrue or at least incomplete".