There's this red sails article that pops up every once in a while. Don't get me wrong it's a fine article, but there's a bit that goes "something something don't think people are brainwashed and just need to be exposed to uncomfortable truths."
And like, I get it. But...that's exactly what happened to me. I mean, I'm not going to say it was exactly one thing that caused it. However, genuinely when i learned about the Iraq War in detail*, that was basically what flipped the switch in my head. Obviously I wasn't as theoretically developed as I am today, but thats what made me genuinely want to read Marx, Lenin, Mao, etc. It was exactly that process of being exposed to information like that that made me want to be a communist, and want to fight for it.
This isn't some debunking thing. I think what I'm trying to explain is that my story seems to be very different from other people's, and applying my own experiences might not really work if it's not how things commonly work.
And, as much as it is important, I do want something more in depth than just "organize and educate." Don't get me wrong, that's good advice. What I'm trying to ask moreso is, what is the actually psychology going on behind these decisions here? Obviously there's no cookie cutter/one size fits all strategy here, but some direction would be helpful in actually attempting to convince people.
*To elaborate, I always heard of Iraq as just "the war." Kinda like how Vietnam was. But no one ever explained to me what it was and school didn't really neither. So when I learned it was basically the US invading Iraq almost explicitly for oil and no one got punished for it and basically everyone got rich off of it besides normal people while hundreds of thousands Iraqis died, it really shook me.
Generally, it's a two-stage process. One must be sufficiently unsatisfied with the status quo or open to new ideas before new information is accepted that overturns your worldview. The working classes are generally going to already be closer to that, but even among workers there is significant striation. New information does work, but on people who are in the proper stage for it. It's driven internally.
What we do is focus on those that are radicalized and lead them to correct theory and practice over time. Agitating among those whom the system benefits (or those who believe the system benefits them) is far less effective than focusing on those left behind. Dialectical Materialism informs us that it is through the working classes actively engaging in social relations that they come to working class ideology, we meet them there and guide them to proper theory and practice.