Anyone interested in joining other forums and discussing our philosophy?

[rp4prez]

I had a thought just recently and was wondering if anyone would be interested in helping out.

I know a lot of you out there are interested in spreading the C4L message but may not really have the time to get too involved in your local community etc because of life, but have time to post here and other places because, like me, you have a job where you sit in front of a computer all day.

With that said, I was wondering if anyone would be interested in joining say one to two other message forums that are neo-conservitive, liberal, etc just whatever and start talking about our beliefs? We could come in and support each other's views etc and be very nice in our responses as to not get banned from the site and state facts with links that support our points of view from creditable sites.

Anyone interested in doing that?

[SnappleLlama]

I would if I had more time. Right now, in fact, I'm writing a paper for one of my grad school classes. What websites did you have in mind?

[Deborah K]

I'd be interested in doing this.

[Malakai]

Already do. I talk about this stuff everywhere =)

[nate895]

I am a member of several other boards, some of which I actively post on, that are dedicated to politics, though generally they are for debating and all points of view. I, however, extremely dislike debating on the internet. It is stupid, and due to the degree on anonymity the internet allows, no one is ever convinced, and many will simply dismiss you as stupid. The best place to debate with someone or to try to convince is face-to-face, and for them to be a friend or family member.

Also, Godwin's Law was originally for the internet (though, I'd argue, it applies to all debates), and Hitler will eventual be used, and it is really hard for pro-state people to use Hitler against us, so we will almost assuredly use it, and that will end up with us losing for using argumentum ad hitlerium, at least in the minds of our opponents.

[dannno]

I, however, extremely dislike debating on the internet. It is stupid, and due to the degree on anonymity the internet allows, no one is ever convinced, and many will simply dismiss you as stupid. The best place to debate with someone or to try to convince is face-to-face, and for them to be a friend or family member.


I completely disagree. I think the internet is an excellent place to debate and win over the views of others.

And did you know that Hitler basically said exactly what you just said right there?

[paulitics]

If you look at forums, you may have 2 people debating but 500 people viewing the post. If you convert just one person on this issue, it was worth your time. Don't think that you don't have a huge audience in the background because you do. The internet is the new media, and if it remains free than in 2012 it will overtake the television as the most importand medium in politics.

[Zera]

I wouldn't recommend it. You guys have no idea how offsetting you are when you refer to anyone with slightly different beliefs as you as "sheeple".

[Deborah K]

I wouldn't recommend it. You guys have no idea how offsetting you are when you refer to anyone with slightly different beliefs as you as "sheeple".

If the goal is to "win" them over, then calling them names would be stupid. The best way to win someone over is to use whatever works on yourself. Winning someone over usually takes a lot of time and effort. First you have to earn their trust and respect and you have to understand that anytime you pull someone (however gently) out of their comfort zone, you create cognitive dissonance for the person. It's a process, but it's well worth it if you succeed. :)

[newyearsrevolution08]

If the goal is to "win" them over, then calling them names would be stupid. The best way to win someone over is to use whatever works on yourself. Winning someone over usually takes a lot of time and effort. First you have to earn their trust and respect and you have to understand that anytime you pull someone (however gently) out of their comfort zone, you create cognitive dissonance for the person. It's a process, but it's well worth it if you succeed. :)

I disagree, make them feel extremely stupid, let them know how idiotic their entire thought process is. Don't forget to talk down on how they were raised and throw a few jabs at their mom and dads beliefs and ideals while you are at it.

[Deborah K]

I disagree, make them feel extremely stupid, let them know how idiotic their entire thought process is. Don't forget to talk down on how they were raised and throw a few jabs at their mom and dads beliefs and ideals while you are at it.


I'm sure you are being facetious, but that, unfortunately, seems to be the common tactic.

[liberteebell]

I wouldn't recommend it. You guys have no idea how offsetting you are when you refer to anyone with slightly different beliefs as you as "sheeple".

It's a great way of trying to win people over IF you're willing to take the time to do it right. In other words, you can't hit people over the head with a sledgehammer full of information or call them ugly names. That's about the fastest way of turning people off so they NEVER consider your POV and dismiss us as a bunch of rabid, arrogant kooks.

I'm someone who came to this way of thinking by reading, primarily on the internet, and listening to tons of stuff. It didn't happen overnight. It took someone saying something that made me say, "hmmmmmmm..." and seek information on my own.

Calm, reasoned, rational and logical posts will get someone to think. Leave the personal attacks aside.

/my 2 cents

[Expatriate]

If you look at forums, you may have 2 people debating but 500 people viewing the post. If you convert just one person on this issue, it was worth your time. Don't think that you don't have a huge audience in the background because you do. The internet is the new media, and if it remains free than in 2012 it will overtake the television as the most importand medium in politics.

+1. Just look at the ratio of viewers to posters on this forum.


I wouldn't recommend it. You guys have no idea how offsetting you are when you refer to anyone with slightly different beliefs as you as "sheeple".

The only people who insult those who have yet to wake up are the ones who wish to prolong their sleep. I believe the majority of us are differently motivated.

[Andrew-Austin]

Anyone who can persuade a single one of the members on this board deserves a medal: http://theobamaforum.com/index.php

[SnappleLlama]

You know what? I don't think I'm cut out for this "converting others" thing. I just don't have the patience. I get way too frustrated. Any pointers?

[heavenlyboy34]

Anyone who can persuade a single one of the members on this board deserves a medal: http://theobamaforum.com/index.php

They have a forum called "The Obama Youth Brigade"!! :eek: Brings back memories of the Hitler Youth...:p

[SnappleLlama]

Anyone who can persuade a single one of the members on this board deserves a medal: http://theobamaforum.com/index.php

I think that site's hilarious! It's a joke site....right?

[Andrew-Austin]

You know what? I don't think I'm cut out for this "converting others" thing. I just don't have the patience. I get way too frustrated. Any pointers?

At first, go easy on droppings names such as "Ron Paul", "libertarian", "republican" etc according to your audience. People tend to take labels more seriously than the concepts behind them, and have attached all sorts of ill-conceived notions to each term. Dropping names and terms from the get go leaves you with the enormous task of dissecting their views on them. Few of us have time to teach liberals about economics for example. Gain an understanding of what someones general political views are and then focus on breaking their trust in government.




I think that site's hilarious! It's a joke site....right?

http://theobamaforum.com/showthread.php?p=3035#post3035

Maybe.

[SnappleLlama]

At first, go easy on droppings names such as "Ron Paul", "libertarian", "republican" etc according to your audience. People tend to take labels more seriously than the concepts behind them, and have attached all sorts of ill-conceived notions to each term. Dropping names and terms from the get go leaves you with the enormous task of dissecting their views on them. Few of us have time to teach liberals about economics for example. Gain an understanding of what someones general political views are and then focus on breaking their trust in government.

Good idea, actually. I guess where I go wrong is prefacing every conversation with "Have you heard of Ron Paul?" It's unfortunate that the good Doctor's name is causing others alarm!

[nbhadja]

I wouldn't recommend it. You guys have no idea how offsetting you are when you refer to anyone with slightly different beliefs as you as "sheeple".

Says the guy who supports facist communist pro war pro bailout Obama (yes I know that the neo cons are the same as the neo liberals and both are trash).

[nbhadja]

I converted a girl on facebook. She was an Obama supporter but now she supports Ron Paul.

[Deborah K]

You know what? I don't think I'm cut out for this "converting others" thing. I just don't have the patience. I get way too frustrated. Any pointers?

Debate the issues only, by backing up what you state with fact. If someone slams you down anyway, you're winning because they can't argue with you based on the facts so they have to resort to insulting you - point that out to them. Even if you don't win them over, you might win someone else who's reading your argument. And if you can, try to find some common ground with them.

You don't need to say anything about libertarianism, or Ron Paul, or anything like that. Just argue the issue: free markets, limited gov't, individual rights, personal responsibility, the Federal Reserve, etc. As people get to know you, and as you start to feel comfortable, you can talk about your political persuasions.

[Bruno]

I converted a girl on facebook. She was an Obama supporter but now she supports Ron Paul.

:D

[nbhadja]

It is hard converting people, but once you do they will realize just how fucked up everything is and they will start to convert people. We are like a virus, but a good virus.

As posters have said, do not mention Ron Paul, libertarians, and when you mention how republicans are pro war, be sure to also mention how the democrats are pro war. Same when mentioning how the democrats are for huge government and unbalanced budgets, right after that mention how the republicans are also for massive government and unbalanced budgets.

If you only say "Republicans are pro war" the sheep will revert back to their bipartisian mindset they have been brainwashed in and think "the democrats are anti war".

The people think that the republicans are free market so the first thing is the establish the fact that our currency failing economy is socialist, not capitalist. They might not believe it but once you tell them how we have non competiting paper money, a central bank that sets out interest rates, extreme economic regulations they might start to believe you.

Some people are hopeless so just move on lol.

[Theocrat]

Here is a forum discussion board where I think we all would fit in nicely. (http://www.arguewitheveryone.com/) :D

[orafi]

I am a member of several other boards, some of which I actively post on, that are dedicated to politics, though generally they are for debating and all points of view. I, however, extremely dislike debating on the internet. It is stupid, and due to the degree on anonymity the internet allows, no one is ever convinced, and many will simply dismiss you as stupid. The best place to debate with someone or to try to convince is face-to-face, and for them to be a friend or family member.

Also, Godwin's Law was originally for the internet (though, I'd argue, it applies to all debates), and Hitler will eventual be used, and it is really hard for pro-state people to use Hitler against us, so we will almost assuredly use it, and that will end up with us losing for using argumentum ad hitlerium, at least in the minds of our opponents.

check this n00b out lawlz!!

[paulitics]

Another fact to remember is that the government, esp military operatives, fbi, etc, go on to sites like digg, daily kos, huffington post and other blog sites and spew forth pro government imperialistic, globalist propaganda. This is not opinion, but fact and they have admitted it. Pretty revolting isn't it .

Why would the government spend so much time and money on something if it is ineffective? They are trying to control the public opinion on the net like everything else of course.

Don't sweat the thick headed kool aid drinkers, the ratio of audience members to posters is like 500 to 1. Just stick to the facts and keep your cool. Both the liberals and conservatives know they are being lied to by their parties. The daily kos crowd will be pissed for Obama's complete reversal on civil liberties and foreign policy. We gain credibility with each politician's lie.

There are a few of our guys on Hannity forums that are very good, and spread the message without mentioning Ron Paul every other sentence. I know they are getting people to think by soft selling. I do agree it is counterproductive to try and close the deal. Just inform and spread the message.

[Deborah K]

So where can we be most effective in waking people up? Ann Coulter? Bill OReilly? Hannity? Obama's forums? Where else?

[tajitj]

Both fairly active. I forget to go over and spread our ideas but we should all give it a try.

http://politicalcrossfire.com/

http://www.politicalforum.com/

[rp4prez]

It's a great way of trying to win people over IF you're willing to take the time to do it right. In other words, you can't hit people over the head with a sledgehammer full of information or call them ugly names. That's about the fastest way of turning people off so they NEVER consider your POV and dismiss us as a bunch of rabid, arrogant kooks.

I'm someone who came to this way of thinking by reading, primarily on the internet, and listening to tons of stuff. It didn't happen overnight. It took someone saying something that made me say, "hmmmmmmm..." and seek information on my own.

Calm, reasoned, rational and logical posts will get someone to think. Leave the personal attacks aside.

/my 2 cents


Debate the issues only, by backing up what you state with fact. If someone slams you down anyway, you're winning because they can't argue with you based on the facts so they have to resort to insulting you - point that out to them. Even if you don't win them over, you might win someone else who's reading your argument. And if you can, try to find some common ground with them.

You don't need to say anything about libertarianism, or Ron Paul, or anything like that. Just argue the issue: free markets, limited gov't, individual rights, personal responsibility, the Federal Reserve, etc. As people get to know you, and as you start to feel comfortable, you can talk about your political persuasions.

The posts above that I've quoted have hit onto something. Some rules would be good to have before venturing off into this task.

* don't say anything about libertarianism, or Ron Paul, or anything like that.
* debate the issues only.
* back up what you say with facts.
* stay calm, reasoned, rational and logical

This should help us out a ton. We also all need to be on the same forums and know who each other are so that way we can support each other's debates.


Both fairly active. I forget to go over and spread our ideas but we should all give it a try.

http://politicalcrossfire.com/

http://www.politicalforum.com/

Great sites! I'm on constantchatter.com and they all hate me over there.. lol.

What site would you all want to give a go on first?

[Matt Collins]

http://Forums.hannity.com

:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[acptulsa]

Doesn't everyone do this? Seriously?

Yeah, lots of good pointers in this thread. In particular, and as Deborah said, do not concern yourself with your opponent. Your main antagonist is probably either a paid government hack or some bored old idiot (thank God our own bored old resident is no idiot) and not only will you never convince this person, you don't need to. Always, always aim your argument at the audience, never at your antagonist. Don't fall for letting them make you seem dogmatic--calmly state that the question has been asked and answered and ignore it from then on. That way people see that it is the other side that is dogmatic. Likewise, don't get mad.

Get even. Even if you have to stop and calm down--or come here for ideas. I can't count the number of times we've helped each other out this way. Call it collectivist if you will, but I'd much rather see us hang together than hang seperately...

[qh4dotcom]

I already do...yesterday I scolded a Ron Paul supporter from Yahoo Answers who voted for McCain...here's his last message



Ok. You win. My vote counted for nothing. I suspect, unless you voted for Obama, yours did too. I have no intention of arguing with someone who, for all intents and purposes, is on the same side I am.
Happy Thanksgiving.

[angelatc]

With that said, I was wondering if anyone would be interested in joining say one to two other message forums that are neo-conservitive, liberal, etc just whatever and start talking about our beliefs? We could come in and support each other's views etc and be very nice in our responses as to not get banned from the site and state facts with links that support our points of view from creditable sites.

Anyone interested in doing that?

I joined hotair and Mallkin just for that reason. I always post a note here when they have open enrollments too. I don't know if anybody took the offer up, but I am not the only Paul supporter commenting, and his message gets a whole lot more respect now than it did a year ago. I tend to steer clear of the anti-Muslim and war threads too.

I can't do liberal sites, but I know there are people here who can.

I am on Yahoo Answers too, but there's not many points to be made there. Chat isn't allowed - just questions.

I'll meet up on other sites too - just let me know where we'll be and I'll go. And I won't be snippy like I am here. :)

[unconsious767]

There's a bunch of fedlovers in this here thread:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=52&threadid=2250225&enterthread=y

[constituent]

what's it pay?

i'll make their heads-spin, and have them convincing themselves of "our" points in no time flat.

[Andrew-Austin]

There's a bunch of fedlovers in this here thread:
http://forums.anandtech.com/messageview.aspx?catid=52&threadid=2250225&enterthread=y

Jesus, that thread is disgustingly sad.

[Nate K]

arguing is surely fun and think we should do more of it, NOT for the purpose of recruiting others but to shape our argument into a flawless weapon for those who are truly open to an idea such as liberty.

[jrich4rpaul]

I agree with the OP as long as it was done in a peaceful way.