[awacs]

I've been a remote engineer for about 10 years now, just over 50, enjoy programming but most of my friends have dropped off or gone crazy (trumpers) in recent years, and I never got married.

I recently took a local wheel throwing (pottery class), which was daunting at first, among a class of almost all females, younger, etc, but im 6 months in and literally just interacting with humans is one of the best parts of my week. Hobby is pretty cool too, so completely different than banging code all day.

Sometimes I don't feel like going after days of being alone and literally talking to no one, it puts you in a "zone" for sure, but then I go to the class, and you realize, at least imho, humans are social creatures. It's like food, we need that interaction or we whither and die.

[ggfdh]

The inability of your friends to have non-political conversations can be a big part of isolation. I follow the “no politics, no religion” rule when I go out and it’s served me well.

You can have political/religious conversations with people who disagree but often it feels like walking in a mine field.

[publicdebates]

On one hand, I always want to keep an open mind about religion and politics, and I'm always interested in hearing what others are passionate about, even if it's in those topics. That's how I've learned so much of what I have.

If everyone followed the rule of avoiding these topics, I wonder how many people would never hear an opposing opinion, maybe even a more beneficial one, to the one they've grown up with. I think these topics should be encouraged.

That said, the moment you disagree with someone on one of these topics, some people will definitely fly into a small rage, or instantly cut off contact with you, or even slander you to others, or some mix of these.

Ultimately, I think that's fine. For one thing, you have just learned that this is someone you probably don't want in your life anyway, because they can't handle disagreement in a civil way.

And you learned it fairly quickly and at a small cost. Even if they slander you, people whose opinions you'd actually care about will generously take their word with a large dose of salt, especially based on their character, since such a character usually has other tells too.

So my current stance is to just be open to these topics.

Just yesterday, while I was sitting here at the library, someone approached me and asked me to watch his phone while he used the restroom, in case ICE came in and took it. He was joking, but we went into a slight conversation about politics in general, in which we found out that we disagree on certain topics, and he almost took offense at me disagreeing. I was friendly and open to him the whole time, and he was friendly when he left to use the restroom. But when he came back and sat back down, and later left the whole library, he left without even so much as a goodbye or wave. It seems like he just didn't like me anymore because of my disagreement. And that's fine with me. Both would have been fine.

[ryandrake]

> That said, the moment you disagree with someone on one of these topics, some people will definitely fly into a small rage, or instantly cut off contact with you, or even slander you to others, or some mix of these.

I think this is what changed. I remember being a kid in the 80s, and when my parents had friends over, someone would inevitably bring up Reagan or something, but the discussion would always be polite and graceful, and then people would move on to something else. So many people seem to be incapable of this today. Politics comes up and suddenly the friend group is cut in half and daughters don't talk to fathers anymore. It's wild.

[hallole]

Huh, that's neat. I've suspected that our political fervor is one of those things that we take to be uniquely NOW, of the present moment, but has actually been a staple. (Like how every generation believes its successors to be dumber, less respectful, ...) But, maybe that's not so!

[ggfdh]

Don’t you care that you made them mad?

[publicdebates]

Not at all.

First, I didn't express an evil or hateful opinion, or any which could reasonably incite indignation or justified anger.

Second, I was willing to dive into a discussion, he wasn't. He seemed more closed minded, which to me seems to be a sign of emotional immaturity.

Third, we did (implicitly) agree to disagree, which I think is the right, peaceful, mature, and civil course of action when at an impasse.

Fourth, we weren't even at a genuine impasse, but an artificial one he created by simply ending the conversation after finding out that I didn't agree with him. Maybe if he heard my reasons, he might find something he agrees with, or something that tempers his emotinonal reaction?

[ggfdh]

Why would he ever hear out your reasons? He just wanted to go to the bathroom and you tried to start a debate.

[publicdebates]

I must have explained it wrong. He was the one who brought up politics, and also asked for my opinion about it during that interaction. He was clearly not in a rush, having come over to my table to ask the favor, and lingered here while mainly sustaining the conversation by himself, while I merely gave short answers to everything he said, partly to let him exit at any time to use the restroom, and partly because I neither expected or particularly desired a conversation, though I was okay with it as long as he wanted to have it.

[gofreddygo]

> follow the “no politics, no religion” rule

These two are a strict no go for me too.

Another thing that worked well for me is to keep discussions very low and quick on topics like personal relationships, work, career and hot button topics like AI, weather, traffic, climate change, house prices, etc. Basically avoid anything that a newspaper would think is worthwhile for frontpage or editorial column.

I go heavy on food, travel, culture, rumors, art, movies, music, design, festivals, holidays, games. You could talk hours on stuff here, just pick an artsy cultural magazine or subreddit and keep up.

Side note, inviting views from both sexes makes for some very interesting short conversations. Both have very very different takes on the same things and therefore won't talk too long. Both being interested in very different things (think dress belts, hair supplements, birth control vs fishing, bourbon and soccer) brings some newness into the conversation.

[freeplay]

Seems like everything is a hot button topic these days. Even things like movies get connected to a hot button in one way or another.

[maerF0x0]

> mine field

This is an element of cancel culture, or a culture which indoctrinates to tattle/report one another.

[sjducb]

Cutting people off because you disagree politically is new. I remember having friends in different political parties when I was younger. (20 years ago)

[Lord-Jobo]

The red scare famously effected social groups from the very wealthy to the poorest immigrant. Civil rights before it. Social-political exclusion is not new in the U.S, but how big the “I ignore politics and politics ignores me” group is, is highly variable. In good times, when people are generally happy, political representatives have a fewer differences and the “happily apolitical” group is very large. This aligns with the Clinton-Bush JR era.

The problem is, those eras are uncommon even in the U.S in the broader view of history, and depend entirely on being the right demographic. Such as being a Muslim American in the decade following 9/11. I can assure you, they did not experience the “friends of a different political party” effect at that time.

[Underphil]

I had the same experience, but the difference these days seems to be that so many people can't NOT talk about politics. There are certain folk who just find a way to shoehorn it into any conversation. It is really draining.

This is anecdotal, of course.

[ryandrake]

Yea, it's possible to be very politically enthusiastic and active, but also NOT bring up your favorite (or hated) politician in every damn discussion. We all have that uncle that can't let everyone else enjoy Thanksgiving dinner anymore because he has to make it about Trump or something.

[maerF0x0]

I agree. It got really intense roughly 10 years ago.

[Nurw]

This feels like a uniquely American advice. I have had pretty heated, but not damaging, discussions with people on the completely different side of the political spectrum here in Norway. I can't remember a single time I have cut someone out for having a different political opinion.

Maybe the loneliness problem is partly connected to the American political system at this point in time?

[ArlenBales]

Half this country voted for and supports a vile lunatic president hell bent on destroying the U.S. to enrich his personal wealth and power. It's not surprising that over here we Democrats view Republicans as a cancer we want nothing to do with.

It wasn't always this way. In the past Republicans actually had some decency. That went out the window after they elected Trump twice.

[blindriver]

I'm the same age as you and most of my friends are remote, on the other side of the country or in different countries, etc, and I maintain contact all the time, for decades. I still have friends from elementary school, middle school, high school, university, and from most of my jobs going back 30 years. I can pick up my phone and call some of my coworkers from 25 years ago without hesitation and we will go for lunch at the next opportune time.

> most of my friends have dropped off or gone crazy

If you find yourself to be the one who is isolated, then I think you need to look inward. My best friends and I share completely polar opposite politics. We have known each other for almost 50 years now. We have had yelling matches over politics, especially during the Pandemic. We have now stopped talking... about politics. We still chat every single day throughout the day. I laugh heartily at least once a day over some extremely offensive joke that one of us sends, usually at each other's expense. But we never, ever talk about politics anymore and we are happier for it.

Maybe you need to rekindle those friendships and see if you can avoid politics. If you can't then I think it's more on you than them and you should reflect on that.