#i stayed by appreciating and uncomfortably grappling with the petaled you brought forward

[emilianadarling]

You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into is a really, really important message that needs to be internalized.

Feelings don't care about your facts.

In Doppleganger, Naomi Klein characterizes conspiracy culture as often "getting the facts wrong, but the feelings right". And when there are real unaddressed issues, real things people are feeling, it leaves a vacuum. And that vacuum leaves a lot of space for misinformation and disinformation to take hold; for right-wing strategists to speak to those feelings, even if the 'solution' they're offering will actually make the problem worse.

And it's very hard to combat that problem with facts, especially when the act of doing so is interpreted as telling someone that what they're feeling isn't real.

If facts don't work, what does? There is no easy answer, but here are some learnings gained from others who have lived through or studied similar challenges:

Narratives: Hannah Arendt was a German-American Jew and political theorist; after WWII, she wrote extensively about totalitarianism. She argued that narratives can be more compelling and convincing to people who are more moved by feelings than they are factual data. For those people, the consistency of the narrative built by lies/propaganda is more compelling; once they have bought into that narrative, they will go to extreme lengths to ignore facts that contradict it. When lies are repeated over and over, it enforces that sense of consistency over time. A compelling narrative grounded in truth can be more compelling and effective than 'facts'.

Stories, Not Silence: Naomi Klein, a Canadian author and activist, has written about various topics over the years but most recently published "Doppleganger: A Trip Into the Mirror World" about COVID-era political polarization and conspiracy theories. She argues that to drain conspiracy theories of their energy and power, we need to be better at telling stories about topics and concepts that have become dominated by the right rather than ceding that space with leftist silence. She also argues that we need to become better at connecting in person, or at least connecting in a way where we are less vulnerable and susceptible to lies about each other.

Connection and an Envisioned Better Future: Timothy Snyder is an author and leading scholar on tyranny, freedom, and Soviet Russia. He argues that authoritarian regimes depend on people getting used to hearing the things they want to hear, and in moving people further away from shared facts we all agree on and towards emotion - either emotion to divide us, or to bring us together. Over time, the strong emotions and repetition of what you want to hear changes you: from a person who cares about facts and can function in the public sphere/democracy to a person who can't. Authoritarians argue that no one can be trusted and there are no facts - but if there are no facts, it's all emotion. It's all what feels right to us -- and we cede the field to people who are good at making things feel right to us. Fantasy becomes better than facts. Changing this means both a positive vision/fantasy for the future of the country and collective action. Collective action is hard, but possible: it means connecting with people in real life, talking with people we disagree with -- and it doesn't have to be everyone all at once. "If 10,000 little groups do 5,000 little things, that will make a tremendous difference."

This isn't comprehensive by any means, but there are some shared themes. Other important elements -- like trust and how to rebuild trust that has been damaged or broken -- are also critical, but would warrant an entire post of their own.

Thanks to OP for the hard but worthwhile prompting thoughts. The road ahead will not be easy, and it can be hard to understand or grapple with perspectives so different and detached that it can feel like we're living in alternate realities instead of the same country as each other. When the things that seem to have such wild appeal to a certain portion of the population are so viscerally repellent to others. But at least we are gifted with the learnings and hard-won insights of other who came before or walk alongside us.

The article 10 Ways to Be Prepared and Grounded Now That Trump Has Won provides good advice here. First, trust yourself. Find others you can trust. Grieve. Release that which you cannot change. Find your path to resistance.

But then, at minimum -- even if you yourself don’t want to engage with them (which is fine) -- we’ll all have to give space to those who can and do experiment with new language to appeal to others who don’t share our own worldviews.

I think it's important to understand that the vast majority of voters do not spend much time thinking through their political decisions because it's simply not something that occupies much space in their minds. You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into, and it's extremely difficult to fight feelings with facts.

Now that the Democratic party's inner core is highly-educated cosmopolitan urbanites, it seems to have lost the ability to deal with that reality.

Most people do not feel like trump is a fascist, or that he wants to be a dictator. Most people do not feel like any of Biden's massive legislative/executive accomplishments improved their lives at all. Most people do not feel like Harris's platform would've actually gotten done or helped them. Most people feel like Trump ran a better economy and that it's Democrats' fault that inflation got so bad.

In an individualistic, selfish nation with one of the worst education systems in the industrialized world, a political party cannot win by serving up a charcuterie board of various poll-tested policies that it then tries to explain to people who could not care less and don't understand anyway. It needs to create an overwhelming feeling, a feeling that changes the minds of people who don't give a fuck about anything but themselves and their wallets. Trump found that overwhelming feeling. Through bravado, cruelty, and levity, he created this zeitgeist of blunt, confident grievance that countless prideful people who feel left behind by the economy could grab onto. This feeling inspired people far beyond his cult of enthusiastic fascists and self-identified bigots.

The country chose trump because Trump's brand, vibe, and message inspired compelling emotions in more people, especially in people who have no interest in civic engagement, don't follow the news, and have been given little understanding of government/economics by our failing education system.

This problem wasn't fully apparent in 2022 during the midterms, when more low-propensity voters stayed home and highly-educated, highly-engaged people made up more of the electorate.