Different political views

@notwavingbutdrowning1 what views? What are you on about? Happy to answer but you’re not been very clear about your question and jumping to being confrontational straight away. Calm down a bit, I’m happy to talk in good faith.

Don't worry, @Ngmi, I completely understand that you don't want your views to be troubled by the facts. How inconvenient would that be.

@notwavingbutdrowning1 sorry what do you mean? These are my perceptions of mumsnet, not statements that need facts to back them up.

hmmmm, I think if you express opinions on immigration based on actual facts on this website you will still be called a right wing extremist. Mumsnet is one of the most left wing spaces I’ve encountered. A very centrist opinion shared by the majority of people on the U.K. will he called far right here.

Three statements there and you’ve provided zero evidence to back any of them up.

Glad you managed to sort things out.

Nickknackpattywhack
I'm left leaning but I'm not into a certain type of left wing purity spiral politics.
Sometimes I can even appreciate that someone with centre right views might have good intentions, even if I disagree with them. You can imagine how that goes down on here.

I'd tend to go along with that 🙂

"I am getting increasingly pissed off with being made out to be some kind of left-wing extremist on Mumsnet because I don’t consider all views to have equal weight."

Oh dear, it must be really unpleasant to be characterised in a way that you feel unfairly misrepresents you as a person by complete strangers who've based their view on a single opinion that you've expressed 🥺

hmmmm, I think if you express opinions on immigration based on actual facts on this website you will still be called a right wing extremist. Mumsnet is one of the most left wing spaces I’ve encountered. A very centrist opinion shared by the majority of people on the U.K. will he called far right here.

*lies and prejudice

Completely agree, @LolaSmiles, much of politics is about values.

FWIW, I am getting increasingly pissed off with being made out to be some kind of left-wing extremist on Mumsnet because I don’t consider all views to have equal weight. The anti-asylum-seeker rhetoric is based on lies and prej. In no way is it simply ‘another pov’. You can have another point of view on these matters but if it’s not based on the facts it’s not valid. The same with Brexit - fine to support it on the basis of an accurate economic or political argument but not fine to support it because you think that otherwise we’ll be ‘swamped’ by Turks and denied our right to bent bananas.

Squilliant
I can almost understand it in some ways in the US because on many policy areas the Democrats and Republicans tend to be quite broad churches.
I tend to get the impression that it's not uncommon for people to be socially liberal within the Democrats but hold a broad range of financial positions across what would be centre right to centre left ground in the UK.

I'd probably struggle to be friends with a republican if their main reasons for being republican were on the moral issues (eg abortion, gun control, homosexuality etc) because those topics for me would stray into values territory rather than politics territory.

It is increasingly common, particularly in the US, for people to say they won’t associate with people with whom they disagree politically. Surely that leads to forced conformity, even if not forced by government. How many people working in public services or universities can go to work and say they agree with the Rwanda plan?

Oh dear, @Squilliant. You seem to be confusing state tolerance with individual tolerance.

@notwavingbutdrowning1 it isn’t tolerance if you selectively tolerate only people you agree with. That’s called totalitarianism.

I'm glad you've managed to talk to him about it OP.

You're right. It's easy to respectfully disagree with political differences, but almost impossible to be so diametrically opposed on fundamental moral values.

I would be fine living with someone whose life experience led him to the view that violence in deprived areas might be gang related. I would not be fine with someone whose values accepted that a young victim of such violence should be treated with less respect and whose murder should be investigated less vigorously because of such potential involvement.

The issue is not so much views as values. I would be fine living with someone who had much less liberal views on immigration than I do. I would not be fine who had values that could even contemplate the RNLI not rescuing people in small boats in the Channel.

Not wanting open borders, not wanting to teach children they can change gender, and a police officer noticing a stabbing in a deprived area might be gang related. All sounds fairly rational tbh. He’s hardly the uninomber, just someone who would have been a centrist 15 years ago.

I'm glad you talked things through OP.
This is why it's important not to write people off immediately because of differing views, you sound like you have a lot of respect for each other and are a loving family unit :)

I have very different views to my mum and I've found what works best is just to ask her lots of questions (genuine questions not ones designed to catch her out)- I usually find that what underlies her views isn't unreasonable (even though her conclusions can seem wrong to me) and actually what she thinks is often a bit more nuanced than her initial statements suggest. You can discuss your differing views without it being a debate you have to win and you may find that you end up understanding one another better.

Thank you for the update, OP. I am glad to hear that.

he’s anti illegal immigration, thought Rwanda was a good idea, thinks the rnli shouldn’t be involved

None of those things are particularly controversial and millions of people share some or all of them.

He's anti "illegal immigration" - well, who isn't? Who in their right mind supports illegal immigration? Either you want to stop people coming here, or you want to allow them to come safely and legally. Opposing the current situation of people making dangerous boat journeys isn't anything controversial. Few people would say the present situation is the ideal one.

He "thought Rwanda was a good idea." OK. On the face of it, it's a reasonable solution if Rwanda is a safe country and people are fleeing persecution. It's better to send asylum seekers somewhere safe than let them drown.

He "thinks the RNLI shouldn't be involved" - again, nothing controversial here. The RNLI shouldn't even need to be involved. Action should be taken to prevent overcrowded, unsafe vessels from attempting to cross the channel.

I don’t understand why you bring up politics and show him articles if you find his views abhorrent. You aren’t going to change his mind, you don’t want to leave him, therefore the only thing to do is to avoid the controversial topics.