[Forgeties79]

I just don’t have any interest in having a “dialogue“ with people who want to erase LGBT Americans and burn books. There are some people who can’t be reasoned with or at least won’t be convinced by me. I am not going to waste my time on them, I’m going to continue to engage in dialogue with those who can actually hold a coherent discussion. Agreement isn’t required, but I sure can’t imagine anything productive will come from talking to someone who believes liberals are harvesting “adrenochrome” from children.

I’ve already adopted a stance of not talking politics with people who believe the 2020 election was stolen, and frankly my life has been much better for it. You can’t reason people out of a position they didn’t reason themselves in to. In my experience anyone who believes that millions of “illegals” and deceased voted are incapable of having a real discussion or listening. They will not accept reality.

When RFK Jr. is unleashed on our health system I wonder if people will finally wake up to the fact that conspiracy theorists are not just in the halls of power now, but that their numbers have grown substantially.

[nazka]

If it was true that it’s a waste of time to converse with others when paradings and ideologies are far away or even opposite to ours then if you think about it on a more extreme side diplomacy and ambassadors are then in your view just utterly useless and so much more a waste of time. If you tell me that you can’t do it in your own country and it’s a waste of time imagine the effort they have to do in some exotic culture.

It’s up to you. If you don’t want to do anything that has an impact too.

[Forgeties79]

Surely we can distinguish between the relatively small number of people in diplomatic positions, a selected position with criteria (generally), and the rest of society?

IMO this argument carries very little water but rather “feels” right.