How should I respond to someone who is participating in a conversation with “I'm not racist, but…” and then inevitably starts saying something racist, like talking about immigrants getting benefits or priority in housing?
I mean social events with people I'm not necessarily one of. close, but rather familiar, whom I can encounter almost regularly. I feel like I'm becoming both angry and tongue-tied, and I'm basically sitting with my frustrations in order to maintain some sense of harmony in the group.
I don't want to respond in anger and I'm not sure the facts fit the situation. However, I want to express my disagreement and somehow make it clear that our values do not coincide without being aggressive or contemptuous.
Eleanor says: I used to have a neighbor who was a big conspiracy theorist. She had opinions about the moon and how many of us have been there (zero), about children being sacrificed by the government (many), and about religions controlling the world (at least one). One day I realized that from her point of view it looked as if everyone agreed with her. She talked about children's altars and lunar radars, and everyone, including me, listened politely and said, “Now take care of yourself!” No one has given her evidence that we actually think this is completely wrong.
You leave people in their bubble when you don't tell them you disagree. You help them continue to think, “Most people on the same page“
So I am with you that it is important to express your disagreement: for their sake as much as for yours. This can be a valuable opportunity to learn that other people in their lives see things differently than they do.
I think How whether you do this depends largely on what you are expressing your disagreement for. Is this essentially “for the record”? Or is it to change the other person's mind?
These two things often pull in opposite directions. You can change your mind more effectively by listening, empathizing, forgiving—even if anger and contempt are reasonable responses under the circumstances. It's a well-known rule: make yourself more attractive to be more persuasive (by turning off the anger you have a right to feel), or express your feelings knowing you won't be found persuasive.
It may be worth deciding in advance whether you want to be more persuasive or dissentful. Otherwise, you risk paying the full price for the “difficulty” without achieving either one or the other.
When it comes to expressing disagreement on the record, it's helpful to practice some conversational “block” phrases in advance so you don't have to come up with them when you're tongue-tied. Something like: “I don’t share this point of view and I don’t want to talk about immigrants that way.” Enough to be proof that not everyone is on the same page.
after promoting the newsletter
Another strategy is almost Socratic: ask a lot of questions, require them to define key terms. The trick is to achieve a completely flat affect; this cannot be cross-examination. It should appear that you are sincerely trying to get to the bottom of things. “Why did you say, 'I'm not racist, but?' “What makes someone a racist?” “How do you understand the word “immigrant”?” It's more confrontational. They killed the guy the strategy is named after. But if done well, you can force your opponent to reveal the inconsistency of his own point of view, without even expressing your own.
If, on the other hand, you're trying to truly change minds, you've got a longer road ahead of you. This takes time and relationship building.
And I would remind us of the words of Kwame Ture (formerly Stokely Carmichael): “If the white man wants to lynch me, that's his problem. If he has the power to lynch me, that's my problem. Racism is not a matter of attitude, it's a matter of power.” Trying to change minds is courageous; but the attitude of these people matters only insofar as they join power. You may find that ways to overcome the injustices that make you angry involve changing power, not just the mind.
