(3) Useful alternative models: interfaith dialogue (e.g. Swindler), international conflict mediation (e.g. Rouhana & Kelman, Lederach), restorative justice circles (e.g. Zehr, Sered), marriage and family therapy (e.g. Gottman). All have issues as models for this moment but are good starts.

(2) In this particular case: this is slightly speculative, but I worry there may be a class dynamic we have to address. A lot of MAGA represents class resentment about epistemic authority. I have been ruminating about this since your video "Truth"; more here danthonybau.substack.com/p/truth-has-...

(1) Generally: interactions need to start with diagnosis, not delivery. People who engage in motivated reasoning have motives for doing so. Interview them first to find out what those motives are; they can be complicated. Then figure out how to satisfy those motives in better ways.

I think the (teacher-to-student) information "delivery" and (adjudicative) "debate" models are both inadequate right now. Three suggestions:

MAGA is reacting to the fact that attachment to truth is a class interest. They devalue truth to get power versus the experts. We contribute to incentivizing this. We need a better, more class conscious strategy. danthonybau.substack.com/p/truth-has-...

We knowledge workers have had a monopoly on epistemic authority for a long time. We tell MAGA that their beliefs are insane. We rely on that epistemic authority for our material security.

A lot of MAGA represents a class struggle over social capital.