Alright, no one asked for this but I was off twitter for a while and I need to get this off my flabby chest. During the quarantine period, I was able to become closer with my more conservative relatives and I tried to understand key points of their political stand. So, here goes:

One. They aren't as blind as many would think. They realize that Duterte isn't doing the best job any president must do, but they have this mentality that he is better than the rest. They have this distrust in mainstream politics and are happy to find 'change' as minute as it is.

Two. They have this preconceived notion of being knowing. This is especially true for my aunts and uncles as they would always say that the youth are too naive and, well, young. They also are wary of too detailed narratives or arguments, finding them 'going around the bush'.

Three. On the other hand, they are easily swayed by ethos (credibility) and pathos (emotions). They believe the things they see on Facebook 'cause it's shared by friends and relatives or because it gives them emotional reprieve and justification.

Extending on three, you could understand this more by thinking of it like reading the Mueller Report or the full Constitution of the Philippines. It's hard to do and they don't want to do it. They like summarized information and credible info like newspapers or 'unbiased' news.

Four. Whenever I try to ask them why they wouldn't hold Marcos or Duterte accountable for the atrocities that occur under their administrations, they always shift the blame to people below them. They defend said leaders by depicting them as a human person who just doesn't know.

Extending on four, they are quick to judge Aquino for the SAF44 issue because they wholeheartedly find Aquino's deeds directly irresponsible. They ask questions like, 'Why did he do nothing?' One must truly point out that the personal flaws of a leader for them to accept it.

Five. When I was asking them why they believed such, they always told me about how either a) that's what their family and peers believed or b) they find the other side too 'radical' and 'ridiculous'. This is especially true for the SOGIE issue where my uncle had fierce beliefs.

Extending on five, my uncle had condemned the SOGIE bill because of what he perceived to be 'asking too much'. He shared a post on how 'gays wanted to change the gender of their children in the birth certificates'. This post was then discussed by my mother reaffirming that stand.

Take-aways: One. This might be my centrist-leaning ass speaking but we, progressives, must rather take steps towards incremental progress, rather than put forth policies that risk a lack of compromise. We should learn how to adapt to the moderates on the other side for progress.

Two. As members of a politically-diverse household, we have the moral responsibility to try and understand the conservative viewpoint and, in turn, try to make our liberal views make sense. After all, progress does not arise from deadlock, but from understanding the other side.

Three. Though it will be hard to sway family members on key issues, like abortion, same-sex marriage, and politics, we could still work towards a more level-headed and unbiased narrative for both sides to cooperate. These are humans and they have their reasons.

Four. You will never win a battle of principle with them so fight a battle of benefits. Explain to them why a drug war is harsher. Why abortion could be necessary at certain points. Why LGBT people don't deserve discrimination. Use emotional and 'common sense' appeals.

The case for four is especially true in the case of the drug war. When your uncle would rave madly about how much all those drug pushers need to get killed, ask him how he would feel if his own son, an innocent bystander, would be killed. From there you would witness that- (1/2)

(2/2) -his face would curl up and try to refute you and he will say that it is impossible. From there, pull out the death of Kian delos Santos and other innocent EJK victims, not from Wikipedia, but from a liberal Facebook page. Watch as slow understanding and fear wash his soul.

Five. Imperative to making sense with your conservative relatives is to understand where their coming from. Be ready to make strategic concessions for a better case. Think of it like a chess game, you need to sacrifice the higher principle to lure them in facing the harsh truth.

Case for five: Imagine your aunt told you that Duterte is a good president. You concede but you tell her that he should reform some things. If she agrees, that's great. If she doesn't, the issue will now be you taking a hard position for them to defend. An example would be- (1/3)

(2/3) - his damning of church officials and of God. That's saucy. They would most likely agree that he was kind of out-of-line. From there, you could then say that Duterte needs to improve his language. If she asks whether that's necessary or important, tell her about Duterte's-

(3/3) sexist remarks or his use of curse words in speeches. Ask her how she would feel if her daughter faced those rapey jokes or when her son would do the same to her. Place her in the situation. Grill her. She would give up and agree sooner or later that Duterte should improve.

All of these are things the conservatives are doing. They try to sway people by framing it in a light that helps them. We progressives can't win if we just allow them to play us dirty. We must also play dirtier. Throw away principles when necessary, especially for a higher truth.

This thread-rant was brought to you by:
my unearned privilege of staying indoors;
my gratefulness for our frontliners;
and the several days of my absence on Twitter.

I know no one would read this all, so yeah, sorry for being so extra and shameless. Peace out.