You are never going to "change someone's mind" by arguing with them!
I was reading a rant online from a young woman who was upset that her boomer grandpa keeps sending her offensive facebook forwards about "politics." They really aren't about politics per se, they are just insulting diatribes about how "young people" are deluded and "no one wants to work anymore!" - you know the trope.
One in particular went on for pages about a young college-age woman who comes home from school with her head all full of crazy ideas. It is sort of a parody, almost, as it is so over the top. One semester of college and she's gone full commie! But then gentle, wise, grandfather explains to her the folly of communism and she sees the light! "Thanks, Grandpa!" she says. And no doubt the next day she drops out of college, marries her "High School Sweetheart" (who never went to college but has a "real job") and becomes a "tradwife" and has five kids. And they all lived happily ever after. The End.
It is a typical boomer facebook fantasy - telling those kids "what for" by beating them over the head with facebook memes. Facebook memes like that are not intended to "educate" young people, but are designed to amuse older boomers, who read them and say "right on!" as they commiserate about how awful "young people" are today. Why just today I was at Denny's and the young waitress with the tattoos and piercings was giving me lip! Well, I told her off! And she cowered in defeat. And then everyone stood up and clapped.
Of course, that shit never happened. It is just a fantasy devised by a bored troll at the Russian Internet Research Agency, designed to divide us as a nation - old against the young, left against right, black against white, women against men, and so on and so forth. Divide and conquer is the oldest and most effective play in the book.
But old people gotta old, so there is no point in expecting Grandpa, who is halfway into dementia - or all the way, perhaps - into "changing his mind" about these things or having him stop forwarding this nonsense to you. Just hit the "delete" key and move on with life. He'll be dead soon, anyway. Worse comes to worse, you can always "block sender."
Instead, this young lady wasted a lot of emotional energy and her precious time trying to argue with Grandpa via e-mail and then sending him a 16-page letter (single-spaced, no doubt!) going through his facebook "meme" line-by-line and trying to debunk it, as well as arguing why these straw-man arguments are so offensive. Needless to say, Grandpa didn't read any of it but rather shook his head and said "kids these days, taking offense at every little thing!"
Arguing with nonsense is pointless and that is the point of propaganda. We've had a few years or even decades under our belt dealing with online trolls, who have gone pro. They make nonsense arguments knowing they are nonsense, unsupported by any facts. If you try to logically address them, they ask you for citations to authority. "Do your research!" they say, while doing none of their own, other than to parrot things they read online. By the time you respond to their first nonsense argument, they have already piled-on with ten more, in a technique known as "gish-gallop."
“Never believe that anti-Semites are completely unaware of the absurdity of their replies. They know that their remarks are frivolous, open to challenge. But they are amusing themselves, for it is their adversary who is obliged to use words responsibly, since he believes in words. The anti-Semites have the right to play. They even like to play with discourse for, by giving ridiculous reasons, they discredit the seriousness of their interlocutors. They delight in acting in bad faith, since they seek not to persuade by sound argument but to intimidate and disconcert. If you press them too closely, they will abruptly fall silent, loftily indicating by some phrase that the time for argument is past.”― Jean-Paul Sartre
To an observer, it looks as though the trolls have "won" the argument, as they are spouting all sorts of "facts" and issues, while you are fumbling to cite to authority to rebut their first ridiculous proposition. This is why "fact-checking" doesn't work, as the other side doesn't bother to read your fact-checking or, in fact, care.
I was at the Dentist's office yesterday and they had an actual local newspaper (all six pages of it) with a comic section. The author of the "Mallard Filmore" comic has gone off the MAGA deep-end and was doing "fact checking" in a comic. It must be true because he said so! I think I trust Alley-Oop or Mary Worth more for fact-checking. But it illustrates how fact-checking has failed - the other side can say bullshit and call it "fact-checking" which sounds much better than "alternative facts." It is, in a way, how the far-right tried to co-opt "Fake News" (once used to describe things like Breitbart or OAN) and applied it to the "mainstream media" - a term that they managed to turn into an epithet.
You have to fight fire with fire, and as unseemly as it seems, you are better off insulting your opponent than trying to argue with them. If she just sent back a one-sentence reply along the lines of, "Oh, Grandpa, you and your silly facebook memes!" maybe he would get the message. If you make it appear that only stupid people believe such arguments than maybe they will be shamed into reconsidering. But if you send a 16-page letter with point-by-point rebuttals, well, you have legitimized their argument and they will simply retreat into their belief system.
I think we are perhaps turning a corner on this. The newly unleashed "Dark Brandon" is a step in the right direction. The name itself is taking a page from the far-right playbook, co-opting their "Let's Go Brandon!" meme and turning it on its head. Dark Brandon doesn't try to react to right-wing nonsense arguments with point-by-point rebuttals that no one reads (and rightists never believe anyway) but instead gets down to their level of snarky insults - usually backed up with one simple, easy-to-digest, fact.
And it works, too. Suddenly, it is no longer "cool" (if it ever was) to profess support for Trump, who is caricatured as an obese, smelly old man who farts a lot and shits his pants. In the match-up for who is hip and who is not, it is an easy win for Biden, even if he is five years older than Trump. Trump comes across as the angry boomer forwarding tired facebook tropes. Biden is the hip grandpa you always wish you had. You know, the one who doesn't want to cut your Social Security or outlaw abortion or take over the government by force.
For the policy geeks, the facts speak for themselves. But for the hoi polloi, facts are like garlic to a vampire. You lose an audience with facts, early on.
And lest you think this is some sign of the decline of American politics, bear in mind that the history of our country - and indeed the world - has fallen along similar lines. Name-calling and cat-calling opponents has a long and tortured history. Our "Founding Fathers" had a nasty habit of distributing anonymous pamphlets which spread all sorts of nasty rumors and falsehoods and also engaged in name-calling. Go overseas and you see more of the same - even worse! Ever watched the "proceedings" in the UK Parliament? They just shout over one another.
I am not saying one has to stoop to the level of lying to respond to lies, only that trying to debunk lies is something that only the faithful will actually believe, and they've already come to that conclusion independently. To reach the average smooth-brained voter, you need something more catchy. The guy who buys into Trump's name-calling routines isn't going to be persuaded by some long-winded fact-check. All that does is rally the troops already on your side.
Democrats, it seems, are finally figuring this out, and it shows in the polls. Independent voters are starting to turn on Trump.
Getting back to our young woman, her long-winded 16-page letter isn't going to "convert" Grandpa or suddenly get him to "see the light." A better solution is to simply ignore him, as there is little to be gained in getting him to "change his mind." Disengagement is the best approach (and requires the least effort). His road-to-Damascus experience is something he has to come to on his own - if he ever does. Arguments won't persuade someone whose idea of "clever" is a forwarded facebook meme.
But failing that, just make fun of his memes. Maybe he'll get the point.
