The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
Modern conservatives need a new Political Ten Commandments. At the top of this list needs to be "having fun is more important than making a point," thus saith Rob Long. I know, I know, it sounds like a complete contradiction. We are the party of sound logical reasoning, of fiscal rationality and of objective morality. Yet, I am constantly left asking myself, and others, "how are those arguments working out for you?"
The answer most of the time, is "not so well." I'm in my mid-twenties, and stuck in liberal hell, i.e. an urban university. I'm a socially-conservative reformed Christian with small town values, but I've never changed anyone's mind about politics with a Norman Rockwell print and a John Calvin Bible study. You know what makes kids my age stop slack-jawed, dead in their tracks.....an episode of SouthPark portraying Al Gore as a lonely ex-politico, who is slightly touched in the head, desperately trying to get people to pay attention to him by selling them a crisis.
In my opinion, conservatives need to face facts, we'll never change the deep convictions of those we disagree with unless we win over their common sense first. Am I wrong? Who here was won over to conservatism on the basis of first principles? Alternatively, how many simply noticed that the views held by conservatives just pegged life correctly?
Currently liberal social mores dominate entertainment and for the moment, we're stuck on that front. Does that mean we should beat them at their own game? I say no, because I don't think they're playing a primarily political game, just trying to be funny. This is a talent they excel at because they're not hung up on what message they're sending. If there is a plea I can make to conservatives, it's simply this, express yourself well in whatever field you are in, and the message will get through.
The gist is this: Do we as conservatives, get so caught up in making a point that we start to suck at effectively communicating with people? You may not like all the toilet humor in SouthPark, but shouldn't we at least recognize that this silly little show preps more young minds for the truths of conservatism than 90% of their college education? Are we just taking ourselves too seriously?
I know I said a new Ten Commandments and only delivered one. That means I'm headed back up the mountain. You can submit your own suggestions for the other nine commandments by handwriting them on tiny pieces of paper and slipped into the wailing wall, inaudibly uttering them in prayer and/or meditation, pronouncing them verbally to your local oracle or just posting them directly in the comments section below.
For those of you who haven't found your way over to member R.J. Moeller's Podcast, you ought to give it a listen. It's inspiring.
- Comment (31)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
I would add
2) Keep in mind you are playing the long game. You aren't going to change someones worldview in one conversation.
3) Argue one point at a time from start to finish. Often Liberals will pack so many wrong things into one sentence you will be amazed that the words actual still mean something. Pick the one thing that bothers you the most and run that one to ground before attempting to argue anything else. Don't get sidetracked.
4) Admit when you are wrong or don't know. This adds to long term credibility and prevents you from getting into fights you don't have the data to finish
5) Remember that two people of equal intelligence, logic, and access to information can view the same set of facts and reach different conclusions. How you interpret information often comes down to what your priorities are. A man with a wife and kid who's first priority in life is his wife is going to have a different worldview than a man with a wife and kid who's first priority is his kid.
Edited on October 25, 2011 at 4:31pmDec '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
So, basically you're saying that if you look like you were weaned on a pickle people probably won't listen to anything you say? Agreed.
Jan '11
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
I would revise "having fun is more important than making a point," to "making a point works much better if you show good humor." Additionally I'd point out, it's important to leave the jokes to the people who are good at it. Nothing is more destructive to a good point than a bad joke that falls completely flat.
Edited on October 25, 2011 at 4:39pmDec '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
"I'm headed back up the mountain"
Are you bringing your son?
(Run like hell kid)
Mar '11
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
If you cannot agree on key presuppositions, there is no point even having a conversation. For example, someone who believes "the government can do anything private industry does, and do it better" is not even worth getting past "hello".
And yes, I know many people like this.
I often try the historical arguments: Look! It was tried! Many Times! And it Failed! It NEVER worked!
And these arguments work on me. But a proper liberal does not care; for them, the attempt is more important than the outcome.
Jun '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
Is it a coincidence that so many top conservative writers are humorists? Let's call the roll: Mark Steyn, Rob Long, Andrew Klavan, Florence King, and James Lileks. Does anyone see a trend?
May '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
KP, you're not alluding to a certain presidential candidate, are you?
Dec '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
Briar Ann
KP, you're not alluding to a certain presidential candidate, are you? · Oct 25 at 9:19am
Just a reference I heard growing up about certain people in church who always had that sour look and weren't good witnesses for the cause. Some people can be like that politically as well. Laughter and joviality lowers the defensive barriers and makes the recipient more amenable to what comes after saying, "but seriously..."
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
Foxman: "I'm headed back up the mountain"
Are you bringing your son?
(Run like hell kid) · Oct 25 at 8:39am
Different Jewish patriarch :)
Aug '11
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
I can say I read political stuff again (after years of avoiding it) because I bumped into something Jonah Goldberg wrote.
Sep '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
My experience exactly, and I couldn't agree with you more!
iWc: If you cannot agree on key presuppositions, there is no point even having a conversation. For example, someone who believes "the government can do anything private industry does, and do it better" is not even worth getting past "hello".
And yes, I know many people like this.
I often try the historical arguments: Look! It was tried! Many Times! And it Failed! It NEVER worked!
And these arguments work on me. But a proper liberal does not care; for them, the attempt is more important than the outcome. · Oct 25 at 9:04am
Aug '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
I would add P. J. O'Rourke to the list. And though Dennis Miller is best-known for what he says, he is definitely a writer.
Dec '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
I agree that this gets us no where.
The problem I see, is that conservatives typically have 2 ways of approaching politics and liberals, as missionaries looking for converts or warriors looking for conquests. First, no one wants their mind to be the victim of your intellectual bludgeoning.
Second, most college grads of the last 2 decades got a near lethal dose of post-modernism that, from what I've seen, didn't manipulate them so much as it wiped their slate so clean they lost all sense of needing a foundation of truth, much less a conversion to somebody else's.
The bottom line is we suck as salesman, often just waiting for reality to mug some poor soul so we can swoop in and help rearrange their wreckage. Conservatives have to get better not treating their beliefs like sacred cows, and coming up with a better method of deliver a positive message people actually want to listen to.
Dec '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
Songwriter
I would add P. J. O'Rourke to the list. And though Dennis Miller is best-known for what he says, he is definitely a writer. · Oct 25 at 10:58am
Great list. I love Dennis Miller. I'd probably still listen to the guy, even if he hadn't defected from the dark side. And I still get a kick out of Lewis Black and Jon Stewart, even though, Lord knows they never will. I actually think Stewart is the most effective critic of Obama, on the rare occasion he plays that role.
There is another point I'd stealing from Rob via RJ's podcast, Commandment #2 or #7 or whatever we're up to, might have to be that "truth is still true, even when it's being said by a liberal(or Mitt Romney)." That last qualifier is not Rob, but me, aimed primarily at myself. Not to say anyone would claim otherwise, but we can all get a little caught up in scoring points on the other guy.
Edited on October 25, 2011 at 8:52pmJun '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
My problem comes when I hear stuff that should not be allowed a free pass. Most often it comes in the form of bigotry. I have to decide at that point whether I should object or keep my mouth shut. Over the years I have learned every subtle form of objection there might be. I am also adept at using humour to air my objections. What I have found is that when you use subtlety or humour, the persons making the objectionable comments are generally too ignorant to hear the ojection and take it as licence to continue.
Most often persons say offensive things, because they think or feel they are not offensive. Once my complaint is registered they no longer feel that way. We as conservatives spend too much or our lives biting our tongues, albeit, sometimes for good reason. This reticence, unfortunately, leaves the field wide open to nonsense and even downright stupidity. But, let's get one thing perfectly clear, there are people of a bumptious nature that can never be won over, and I will never surrender the field to these idiots.
Dec '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
Cas: I'd never suggest that you turn the other cheek to bigotry. But why get indignant, get even. Or at least level out the field. We're so used to responding to idiocy with umbrage. If someone says something foolish, laugh at them. In most of these arguments whoever gets mad first loses, and we control that. In my experience, no amount of scolding or righteous indignation has half the effect of the shame of being mocked for saying something stupid that you can't back up.
And yes, there are some people out there that need taken to the intellectual woodshed. They're probably the same 20% of the population that self- identifies as liberal. But with 40% identifying as conservative, that leaves a whole lotta the population who by and large think the lot of us are just too damn stuffy. And a lot of the time they are right, counting me as chief among the sinners.
Major entitlement reform will be hard, and we need that other 40% to make it happen. We gotta kill the talking points about tightening our belts and start talking about giving people their lives back.
Edited on October 25, 2011 at 8:38pmApr '11
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
Case in point: the nonsense spewed by Elizabeth Warren recently. Several liberal FB 'friends' posted and reposted and reposted that drivel on their walls. I could not remain silent, & so they got wall-full of rejoinder in their comments. If silence were golden, I'd be a 1%-er, now.
Someone also wisely mentioned presuppositions. I think the several overlapping lists of conservative humorists, including O'Rourke & Steyn (What? No Rush?, No Iowahawk?), et al betrays the flaw in the presupposition that we're not already well-stocked and equipped to make our case with humor. It's arguable, and so I'll argue the point, that we're actually kinda already loaded for bear, both theoretically/philosophically, as well as in the humor department.
The perception we're not is, I contend, perpetuated by the dominance of the MSM.
Dec '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
Good point.
6) Argue intent to outcome, not first principal to outcome. First principals arguments have no effect on a Liberal.
"We should be wary of regulation because government is corrupt, inefficient, and insensitive to cause and effect" is not as persuasive argument to a Liberal as "The more regulations we have the more private corporations are incentivised to corrupt the regulatory process and the moment it is cheaper to corrupt the process than abide by the regulations private industry will do just that"
As iWc pointed out this isn't foolproof, but it does increase your odds of getting through if you give them a way to accept your premise without acceding to your core beliefs.
Jun '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
I, generally, don't get indignant. But, I will register discontent.
Beasley, you do, however, assume too much. First, that the ignorant are generally able to pick up subtlety and humour—we will have to agree to disagree on this point. My contention is that some persons must be told directly or they will just not get it, which is not to say in an obnoxious, irritated,or irate manner. Second, you assume that the ignorant will learn when the reason they are ignorant is that they have resisted learning and are likely to continue that resistance. Being clever with such people only confirms your opinion of yourself to you. Third, as conservatives, we assume that our trenchant arguments and our good grace will win the day, because we are smart and gracious—this is not the case.
My default position is that I would rather not argue with anyone about anything, and if we were in the same room, Beasley, I am sure that within twenty minutes you would be asking about that quiet guy in the corner. Well, that quiet guy would be me.
Dec '10
Re: The New Ten Commandments for Talking about Politics
Gen. Victor Ball
Someone also wisely mentioned presuppositions. I think the several overlapping lists of conservative humorists, including O'Rourke & Steyn (What? No Rush?, No Iowahawk?), et al betrays the flaw in the presupposition that we're not already well-stocked and equipped to make our case with humor. It's arguable, and so I'll argue the point, that we're actually kinda already loaded for bear, both theoretically/philosophically, as well as in the humor department.
The perception we're not is, I contend, perpetuated by the dominance of the MSM. · Oct 25 at 11:52am
Your correct that the Right has a wealth of humorist. But how many people are reading and listening to them who don't already agree with them?
Every Klavan on the Culture makes me laugh out loud. But it's comedy for conservatives as are all your examples. What I think we lack is more conservatives in comedy letting the laughs lead and the message filter through. What I fear, is that when the message is on the top of the marquee, we just end up depriving ourselves of an audience and influence outside our own little echo chamber.
Edited on October 25, 2011 at 9:13pm