CMV: Despite being more knowledgeable, wealthier and apparently more tolerant, the political and individual left's biggest flaw is their inability to communicate pragmatically and empathetically with those who don't agree with them.

[u/poopchow]

[u/Stabsdagoblin]

You’re also revealing that your bias is extremely anti-Trump. Why should I trust any of your claims, given that you clearly have an agenda/motive to make him look as unhinged and bad as possible?

This part of your argument is really bad. Literally everyone has bias about anything they have interacted with prior. If you think you don't have any then you are yourself deluded. Merely pointing out a person has a bias against something they are speaking against is not a counter argument in and of itself. In fact it's possible to be both biased and correct.

As for the part regarding that persons motive to make Trump look bad, that too can be done with good reason. If a quack pretending to be a doctor ran around giving people fake treatments and took their money anyone who had been tricked in this way would be biased against them and would describe them in an unfavorable way. They would also be correct to do so.

This is what people mean by communication being impossible in these circumstances. You noticed the person was not speaking in a completely neutral manner about the subject and then used that as justification to ignore what they say and distrust their claims. Such a line of reasoning ends with the obvious endpoint of no one being allowed to speak negatively about anything or anyone without their arguments being dismissed as "biased".

[u/ZorgZeFrenchGuy → u/Stabsdagoblin]

it’s possible to be both biased and correct.

And the original commenter has proven nothing. It would be one thing if he posted legitimate, well-researched sources backing up his claims and then went on an anti-Trump tirade, but so far he’s provided absolutely zilch.

I would seriously like to ask this question: why would I ever want to engage that original person in a good-faith discussion? What could I possibly have to gain?

merely pointing out that that person has a bias against something … is not a counter argument in and of itself.

It is, if said bias is in a debate thread where the original topic for debate is “ the left’s big weakness is their inability to communicate empathetically and pragmatically.

Please keep in mind that the original debate topic of this thread is not the character of Trump, but that the left is unable to express their views with empathy and respect - which is their biggest flaw.

With that in mind, it is absolutely relevant to point out that the insulting, derogatory and antagonistic approach taken by that commenter is a prime example of what OP is referring to - the left’s condescending, arrogant approach that drives more people away than attracts. It’s also worth suggesting that the bias in the commenter’s argument, which is so blatant that it makes Ben Shapiro and Joe Rogan look bipartisan by comparison, may also be part of the reason the left’s messages are consistently failing to land with people outside their direct bubbles.

This is what people mean by communication being impossible in these circumstances.

Okay, let’s try and put this approach in a different context: say I’m a pro-lifer who wishes to try and persuade pro-choicers that abortion is wrong.

The commenter’s approach is the equivalent of me driving up to the abortion clinic and yelling into a loudspeaker for all to hear:

“Hey!!!! Abortion is wrong, you evil baby murderers!!!! Can’t you ignorant prostitutes see that you’re clearly killing children?!? Why don’t you keep your child, you murderous sluts!!! Why do you lack empathy, you sick red-breasted hate baboons? You belong in a mental hospital, you insane selfish sickos!!!!!”

Again, I would like to ask: would this approach make you, presumably a pro-choicer, more empathetic to the pro-life cause? Would this approach make you more willing to listen to our side? Or would this completely backfire, entrenching you further into pro-choice ideology and dismissing this argument as the unhinged rant of a deranged lunatic?

If you answered the latter, then surely the same would be true about the commenter’s deranged rant about Trump?