When you’re trying to sell something, you have to understand objection-handling.
Your potential customers will have lots of objections to buying your product or service, and you need to develop ways to handle those objections.
Although there might be dozens of different ones, you’ll likely hear the same few over and over again.
“I can’t see how it would benefit me”
“I can’t afford it”
“I already have something that does that”
You get the idea.
Devising elegant ways to handle those objections is a crucial part of success – for example, if someone says they can’t see how it would benefit them, you might offer them a free trial.
So that’s objection-handling, and we should do the same in political discourse.
When you are trying to “sell” your ideas and your opponent has an argument they rely on all the time, it’s because they think it is solid. They think it’s a winning argument. You need to find a way to defeat it, because if you can’t……………..they might be right.
And that’s the main reason to perform this exercise – we test each other ideas because we want to see which ones work. At least that’s the theory.
So I’d like to propose a little series here – Objection-Handling the Modern Left. A little virtual Working Group where we can lay out what we believe are the most successful and compelling arguments against the strongest and most commonly-used Leftist arguments. At the very least, we will crowdsource some wisdom, right?
I’ll get us started.
An argument I see on the Left quite reliably is the immigration argument that says the reason people are fleeing from their countries to ours is because of the foreign policies of the West.
Which I think is an odd argument, and we should be able to shred it utterly.
Because even if you decided to flee because a country was bombing the crap out of you, why would you flee to THAT COUNTRY?
If the Egyptians were bombing Cardiff, would a tsunami of young Welshmen suddenly commit to an arduous exodus across thousand of miles and turn up at the Pyramids demanding asylum?
And if one of your neighbours was weeing on your lawn every day, would you ask him if you could move into his house?
It’s preposterous – the waves of immigrants coming to North America from South America might have been displaced by American foreign policy (a separate argument), but they seem to be making a beeline for the very nation the Left claims is persecuting them?
And those displaced from the Middle East might have been displaced by European foreign policy (another separate argument), but they seem to be making a beeline for….Europe.
All those persecuted BY the West are heading TO the West it seems – like moths, drawn to flames. Or flies drawn to those hypnotic electrical grids in the chippies of my youth.
If I had been using a trebuchet to fling rocks at the house at the end of my street, and then one day I saw the occupant coming in my direction, I would not assume he was coming to beg for my help.
I would assume he was coming to kick my ass.
And yet no-one challenges this bizarre argument from the Left.
So now we have a clear handle on how strange the argument is, how do we turn it into a pithy statement, so that the next time I get dragged into this argument by a deluded Leftie, I don’t have to go through all this reasoning with her?
How to turn this all into a mic drop?
Who can turn this into the most instantly-destructive zinger?
Over to you, fellow travellers.