Okay so I am really struggling to see what you are describing as writing people off as “going both ways” but I’m the kind of person who needs the obvious typed out really plainly and clearly…
It sucks that you put a lot of energy into people who aren’t engaging with you on your level. I’ve been there, on both sides. The double empathy problem helped me understand this dynamic better. Is that type of situation what you mean?
If so, that’s not really what I meant by writing people off. I don’t just mean not engaging with them, but also thinking of them as worthless or an impediment to your goals, or even as an enemy.
I don’t think anyone should “waste time” on people who aren’t interested in listening. I think that those who have interest and capacity to engage with folks should understand that a person may be more open to a different approach. They may not want to be directly discussing theories or issues. For example, I’m a really big fan of gardening other practical skills. Sharing knowledge or taking a class on a topic like that is a good way to get to know people and demonstrate the power of community and of workers.
The last thing I want to suggest is that people need to spare libs feelings and not say mean things about them on the internet. That feels like being told it gives veganism a bad name to be too “rigid” (🤮). IRL it will take a variety of strategies to participate in raising class consciousness. Just sharing my thoughts on something I’ve only really seen online tbh but I am sure exists in some places!
I mostly mean two way street in the sense that there are also scenarios where you’ve been written off by someone else, and once that happens there’s very little you can do about it.
I typically don’t discuss theory with other people directly, but usually more practical matters like walkable curious cities/neighborhood, identifying causes of bad behavior instead of policing symptoms (e.g. ppl littering in a space with no trash cans available), explaining why some folks including myself don’t feel safe around police, how it’s not as simple as “hard work pays off”, and similar subjects to my somewhat privileged direct and extended family members. There was a lot of discussion during COVID where I was trying to explain to people that even if masks aren’t 100% effective that you should wear them anyways (that even if it were only 10% effective that it makes a big difference on a population scale), that we genuinely could have made the disease into a non-issue if we took it seriously and viewed stuff like lockdowns and social distancing as a civic duty instead of some weird deep state control conspiracy theory thing. I’m also prone to being a little one-note on pointing out profit movies behind a ton of terrible things that keep happening all over the place.
On another point though, there are legitimately people so radicalized in the opposite direction that they’d kill people like me if they had an excuse and the opportunity to. Others functionally are obstacles because of the job they hold or capitalist propaganda they never questioned. What do I call such people? Even “enemy” is too strong a term for most, the roles such people serve are adversarial nonetheless.
On another point though, there are legitimately people so radicalized in the opposite direction that they’d kill people like me if they had an excuse and the opportunity to. Others functionally are obstacles because of the job they hold or capitalist propaganda they never questioned. What do I call such people? Even “enemy” is too strong a term for most, the roles such people serve are adversarial nonetheless.
I was very specifically talking about people dismissing those who have not read theory on that basis alone, not about people who have demonstrated that they are unsafe.
![[Title]](https://lemmy.ml/api/v3/image_proxy?url=https%3A%2F%2Flemmygrad.ml%2Fpictrs%2Fimage%2F0d016d50-9391-4898-b992-904cd50d49a6.jpeg){kind=link}
Okay so I am really struggling to see what you are describing as writing people off as “going both ways” but I’m the kind of person who needs the obvious typed out really plainly and clearly…
It sucks that you put a lot of energy into people who aren’t engaging with you on your level. I’ve been there, on both sides. The double empathy problem helped me understand this dynamic better. Is that type of situation what you mean?
If so, that’s not really what I meant by writing people off. I don’t just mean not engaging with them, but also thinking of them as worthless or an impediment to your goals, or even as an enemy.
I don’t think anyone should “waste time” on people who aren’t interested in listening. I think that those who have interest and capacity to engage with folks should understand that a person may be more open to a different approach. They may not want to be directly discussing theories or issues. For example, I’m a really big fan of gardening other practical skills. Sharing knowledge or taking a class on a topic like that is a good way to get to know people and demonstrate the power of community and of workers.
The last thing I want to suggest is that people need to spare libs feelings and not say mean things about them on the internet. That feels like being told it gives veganism a bad name to be too “rigid” (🤮). IRL it will take a variety of strategies to participate in raising class consciousness. Just sharing my thoughts on something I’ve only really seen online tbh but I am sure exists in some places!
I mostly mean two way street in the sense that there are also scenarios where you’ve been written off by someone else, and once that happens there’s very little you can do about it.
I typically don’t discuss theory with other people directly, but usually more practical matters like walkable curious cities/neighborhood, identifying causes of bad behavior instead of policing symptoms (e.g. ppl littering in a space with no trash cans available), explaining why some folks including myself don’t feel safe around police, how it’s not as simple as “hard work pays off”, and similar subjects to my somewhat privileged direct and extended family members. There was a lot of discussion during COVID where I was trying to explain to people that even if masks aren’t 100% effective that you should wear them anyways (that even if it were only 10% effective that it makes a big difference on a population scale), that we genuinely could have made the disease into a non-issue if we took it seriously and viewed stuff like lockdowns and social distancing as a civic duty instead of some weird deep state control conspiracy theory thing. I’m also prone to being a little one-note on pointing out profit movies behind a ton of terrible things that keep happening all over the place.
On another point though, there are legitimately people so radicalized in the opposite direction that they’d kill people like me if they had an excuse and the opportunity to. Others functionally are obstacles because of the job they hold or capitalist propaganda they never questioned. What do I call such people? Even “enemy” is too strong a term for most, the roles such people serve are adversarial nonetheless.
I was very specifically talking about people dismissing those who have not read theory on that basis alone, not about people who have demonstrated that they are unsafe.