I will try not to reveal much personal information in order to maintain privacy.
Anyway, I've known Alex for most of my life, they were pretty good for most of it.
In recent years, they've gone down the MAGA pipeline, and it's gotten worse and worse over the years.
At this point: about every day they talk about illegal immigrants and Trump, often even making jokes about it.
They talked about it so much, and I tried to tell them the truth (such as that most undocumented aren't criminals, they can't migrate legally, etc.) and even encouraged them to do research about it, but they refused.
Here's where things start to get crazy:
In recent times, anything they see that goes against their worldview is called "fake news" while they literally unironically called Fox News a reliable source. (Another family member made fun of them for "only looking at Fox News," not knowing how right they were.)
They started to say how scared they are about "Venezuelan gangs" and even said that they check their windows and get scared at every sound because they are literally worried that it's one of the "gang members."
Then it happened:
We discussed the Garcia situation, where a legal immigrant was sent to CECOT without trial. We argued about it.
I asked stuff like, "Where's the fair trial? Where's the due process? Should you be punished for a crime you weren't even tried for and convicted of?"
They kept saying lies like, "They DID get a trial! They're an abuser! They're a gang member! Only the worst criminals go there! You just support mean people and gang members!"
This continued back and forth, until it happened.
They cried about how scared they were of the "illegal immigrant gangs" and being attacked by them. That's right, cried, with tears.
I was disgusted. I felt sad because they bought into this propaganda so much. And I felt amused to the point of laughing, which they didn't like.
That person had various problems in their life. And they decided to cry about "the evil brown people coming after me!!!"
I didn't feel sorry for them at all. That's disgusting.
And that was just the first instance.
Recently:
We were having just a mundane conversation in the car, and they made a joke about CECOT and El Salvador. I said that I didn't want to talk about that. They got angry and talked seriously about El Salvador. I told them again multiple times that I didn't want to talk about it, and they kept continuing. They said stuff back at me like "You know who goes to CECOT? The worst of the worst!" so I was forced to confront them like "They send innocent people there without trial, I don't want to talk about it." I keep saying no, they say "I have a right to say what I believe." I say, "I have boundaries, I want you to respect them. Can you please be respectful?" They say, "I cAn'T bElIeVe YoU sUpPoRt GaNgS!1!1!1!"
I tell them that I never said that and I want due process and don't want to talk about this, they sounded like they were going to cry about "the brown people coming to get me again!!!" and I wasn't in the mood to deal with that. Thankfully, I got to my destination soon after.
It is incredibly sad to see somebody I've known throughout my life turn into...this. Of course, there's much worse that could've happened, but this is unbelievable.
They do see a therapist, and I think I should encourage them to talk to them about it.
Do you guys have any thoughts or stories to share?
It is do with their class perspectives on the world stage.
Nearly everyone believes in brainwashing but somehow they are exempt from it. "Brainwashing" (as we understand it in the West) is a CIA invention.
It may be worthwhile also looking up the science of how advertising actually works, for example. It is really difficult to convince someone against their perceived material benefits.
It is important as marxists that we understand this and focus our energy where it is worth it, and not get lost in metaphysical nonsense.
From Masses, Elites and Rebels: https://redsails.org/masses-elites-and-rebels/
Thanks for linking to that Red Sails post -- that's what I had in mind. I think it significantly overstates its case.
It's not that they could look past the propaganda if only they really wanted to, it's not even that they're avoiding the cracks in their worldview. They see the cracks, but they justify them in the manner I described above.
I think the way you get to reachable people is by attacking those justifications, not pointing to the cracks that they already see.
And how successful have you been? Why is it that there have been USAmerican marxists who are smarter, more charismatic and more daring than we are but have failed on the whole in the West in the sense of establishing a DOTP or even a reasonable nudge in that direction that wasn't due to the Global South? Why have the CPC abandoned as a main strategy exporting revolution ie what lessons did they learn from Soviet mistakes? What scientific theory of change do you propose that supercedes all of the above?
The way you reach people is to offer material benefits within the short term. If you can't make that case and understand why then you will resort to idealism.
This has also been tried (the feasible version of it is mutual aid) without much success. The reasons it and other strategies have failed in the U.S. are (1) the repressive arm of the state is so strong, and (2) it's a rich enough country that trying to make it within the system is still a decent option for most people.
Now if we're talking offering them benefits the left can't actually deliver in the short term -- guaranteed housing, education, healthcare, etc. -- you have to go back to attacking their justifications for supporting the status quo. They aren't unaware of (for example) the problems for-profit healthcare causes, and they aren't willfully ignoring those problems, either. They justify it to themselves.
https://redsails.org/witbd-rs-abridged/#34-on-mutual-aid-and-red-tape
I think we're losing track of what the other person is talking about.
I agree that a large minority of the U.S. population, maybe a quarter or a third, is unreachable in the short term (i.e., anything short of a government program offering them major direct benefits). They're probably unreachable for a while even after that due to reactionary attitudes and all the cultural forces that reinforce those.
I think basically the remainder of the population (or certainly the remainder that would ever be politically engaged) can be brought around with promises of major direct benefits (e.g., Medicare for All). I don't think any sorts of benefits within the ability of leftist orgs to actually deliver right now -- benefits more on the scale of the BPP's free breakfast program, or an abortion access fund -- are enough to move the needle right now.
Because we can't offer material benefits on the scale of what would really motivate people, and because mere promises of such benefits are of questionable value, I think we do have to do some politics and try to convince people that our program is better than whatever else is on offer. Saying we can do nothing until conditions change is defeatist, as is saying that it's simply impossible to convince people to change their politics without a materialist carrot and/or stick.
What I'm arguing against is the the maximalist version of "they are choosing to buy in to the system because if they wanted they could just read about the problems I've read about." They see the same looming problems we see, they just justify them away in ways we don't. We don't have to convince them (for example) that climate change is a dire problem, we have to dispel the justification that (for example) their favorite neoliberal approach to the problem is the most we could possibly do. It's not wilful ignorance, it's a political horizon that's been stunted by a lifetime of basically no significant political actors suggesting anything outside of the neoliberal consensus.
Let's take climate change as the example you highlighted. Why have you gone down the right track but they have not? Why have they not chosen to look it up in the first place? Are we going to posit that our political theory of change is that we are smarter and therefore we have outsmarted them in getting there first? If it is due to a political horizon stunted for a lifetime then how come you escaped it? What makes you so special? Is your case replicable at scale? (If you would like you can change the "you" to "one" or even me in all these questions)
I will put it another way. Why is marxism neither workerism nor populism? Why are the proleteriat considered the most revolutionary class?
These aren't gotchas. We need to think of class perspectives and we need to think of it as more than just bourgoisie vs proleteriat.
I believe USAmericans are a significantly reactionary mass that is more than just one-third of the population. And your examples of socdem compromises aren't reassuring.
We, as westerners, as a class on the world stage are regressive. We (as in western MLs) are rare to have these perspectives because it is not in most westerners' material interests to have these perspectives so chances we do because of fucking serendipity and maybe some tangent class benefits. We have to understand our personal class limitations before we can hope to understand the science of dismantling them. This instrospection is hard because... it is not in our class benefit.
However, we have made a case for ourselves that there are benefits scientifically (if not we will fall into reaction ourselves at the first moment of real personal crisis, just look at some artisan takes on AI for example) and we should similarly make the case for others but not ask other marxists to waste precious energy where it is not fruitful.