What is people's opinion on indigenous land usage and special rights? I feel a sense of cognitive dissonance, where I find myself supporting such policies as I highly value preserving and promoting indigenous culture. But there remains a tension between indigenous land rights and the liberal notion that land usage shouldn't be based on ethnicity and that the resources should benefit all of society. Particularly now with the extreme electricity prices, where people are literally dying and is being weaponised by Russia, I wonder whether indigenous people should have the right to prevent building power plants on "their" land. A related issue is exceptions to societal rules, eg. wrt animal welfare where they might get dispensation for the laws that apply to animals for the rest of society. Or in other cases laws applying to rights of their children. It's a conflict between the rights of the individual animal or member of the indigenous group, compared to the rights of the indigenous group as a whole to live according to their traditions, which I find difficult to navigate and reconcile.
Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
We have somehow survived another move.
I feel like a broken record here, but, seriously, good job everyone, and thanks. While the moderators of a community are important, the community simply doesn't exist without its members. Y'all came over here and kept on posting, and that's exactly what we needed.
With luck, this is going to be the last move we ever need to make; we have our own domain and servers, we're no longer really existing with any specific other person's permission.
We are, however, not out of the woods.
I mentioned during some of the original Reddit-exodus posts that I had a serious medium-term worry about userbase. We've cut ourselves off from the Reddit pipeline and that means we're in danger of slowly eroding away; people will always leave the community and right now we don't have a good way of getting new users. We wouldn't be the first community to do so! Every community needs an influx of people, and now we need to figure out the right way to manage that.
So I now have a few requests, ordered roughly by how comfortable I am asking it.
First: Send links to people that you think will be interested. If you know someone looking for political discussion, send them a link to the site as a whole; if there's a specific post you think they'll be interested in, link that. Remember that we have The Vault, which has unfortunately gone a bit neglected while I worked on this changeover. Please don't spam anyone - I don't want anyone just posting links to our front page on a hundred subreddits - but if you have a good opportunity, either regarding friends or communities that you're an established member of, take it.
Second: Propose places that might be willing to do a link trade. I'm planning to reach out to a bunch of subreddits shortly and see if they're willing to crosslink, especially places that are serious-political-discussion-adjacent in the hopes that we can draw off that section of their population and both be better off for it. If you have personal connections you can bring it up to them yourself, otherwise just let me know and I'll see what I can do. I expect a low success rate but even a low success rate might be pretty dang valuable.
(And don't limit this to subreddits! There's a number of good communities out there that aren't on the big social sites.)
Third: If you have time, help out. We have a dev server that you can join if you want to work on a huge number of pending issues, and it's thanks to the people on this server that we've had such a constant flow of updates, fixes, and tweaks. If you're less programmery but more editorial, we do have a lot of Vault-related editing that we'd like to get done; this goes faster than you might think. If there's some other skill you have that you think might be valuable, hop on the dev server and send me a message.
And finally, fourth, which is the one that I really hate to ask, but I'm doin' it anyway.
I've set up a Patreon to take donations. If you have spare cash and think this is a worthy destination for it, please chip in.
I'm not sure what this whole "money" thing is going to end up looking like. At the very least this will pay for server costs; any income above that will go into making the site better, in whatever way seems most valuable. I've been thinking about taking out ads in an attempt to pull more users here, for example, and that isn't cheap.
This is going to be very experimental and will probably involve false starts. I'd love to hear suggestions on good ways to spend money on the site - if you have any, let me know - but note that in order to hire programmers we would need a lot of money.
For those who are more crypto-minded, I'm also taking donations via Ethereum (0xa97e126DCEcC7Ea3AF05d252B49c03ae35547dD9) and Bitcoin (bc1qnj0mvg90dfawjq3kxq4wdvcq0ejksgyf2m0xnq). All of these links are on the new (and very primitive) Support page.
I know there's going to be people who think that we left Reddit just so I could cash out. I frankly suspect that even if I just pile all of the results into a giant sack with a dollar sign on it and walk off while cackling evilly, I still won't be making minimum wage, so this would be a terrible plan :V No, I do actually like this community a ton, and want it to keep going, but I can't fund an indefinite amount of stuff on my own. And part of this push is to figure out just how useful this site is to all of you, in order to see what can be justified and what can't be justified.
So there's the ask! If you have connections, use them; if you have time, contribute it; if you have money and want to put it towards this, please provide financial support so I can figure out how to keep the new-user pipeline going.
If you don't, that's cool! Keep on posting and I hope you enjoy your time here.
Finally, this is the new Bugs/Suggestions/Small Comments thread. If you have feedback, post it here! A lot of the stuff in that Pending Issues link up above was submitted by users, and we're getting through it slowly.
The Wednesday Wellness threads are meant to encourage users to ask for and provide advice and motivation to improve their lives. It isn't intended as a 'containment thread' and any content which could go here could instead be posted in its own thread. You could post:
Requests for advice and / or encouragement. On basically any topic and for any scale of problem.
Updates to let us know how you are doing. This provides valuable feedback on past advice / encouragement and will hopefully make people feel a little more motivated to follow through. If you want to be reminded to post your update, see the post titled 'update reminders', below.
Advice. This can be in response to a request for advice or just something that you think could be generally useful for many people here.
Encouragement. Probably best directed at specific users, but if you feel like just encouraging people in general I don't think anyone is going to object. I don't think I really need to say this, but just to be clear; encouragement should have a generally positive tone and not shame people (if people feel that shame might be an effective tool for motivating people, please discuss this so we can form a group consensus on how to use it rather than just trying it).
I know this isn’t the normal content on here but this happened a stones throw away from where I live and i actually recognize a bunch of the crowd from the night this happened. I must have just missed it. Watch closely, you can see how everyone goes through the guys pockets when he’s down. That’s low.
https://twitter.com/tx_streetfights/status/1569200881593192448
Be advised; this thread is not for serious in depth discussion of weighty topics, this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
For various reasons, I follow Brian Leiter's blog--if you're not familiar, Leiter is perhaps most famous as the originator of a law school ranking website (not updated in some time), and a philosophy graduate school ranking website (since handed off to others). He is an outspoken, sometimes abrasive Marxist, but also decidedly anti-woke. He occasionally cites mostly-approvingly to Freddie deBoer, but is much older and better educated, so it is helpful to read Leiter if you want a sense of what very old school, very leftist academic thinking looks like today.
Anyway a recent entry on Leiter's blog piqued my interest, because I am a word nerd, but not an academic linguist. In it, Leiter appears to be airing his annoyance at the way the word "reification" gets used in its literal sense (making the abstract concrete)--he's praising NYT for using the word "correctly," in its Marxist sense, while also offering further correction:
"Some social scientists have a term--'reification.'" Actually, the terms [sic] comes from Lukacs, one of the few useful concepts from his History and Class Consciousness...
Now, it is true that contemporary Marxists using the term as a term of art are indeed channeling Lukacs. However, the term itself most assuredly does not originate with Lukacs. Etymonline traces it to 1846 (the relevant Lukacs' text arrived in 1923). Wiktionary provides some further context, suggesting that the word is "a macaronic calque of German Verdinglichung." The only other source I've found suggests that the term "emerged in the English language in the 1860s" but no supporting evidence is provided for the claim, and the rest of that blog sticks to Marxist exposition.
That is where my Google-fu caps out. I know that the term today gets used in programming contexts (e.g. LISP) so certainly the word has been genericized whether Leiter likes it or not. And of course Marx himself was writing in 1846, so I can't dismiss the possibility that Marxists did coin the term (either in German, or by being the ones to calque it from German), in which case it might even be a mistake to credit Lukacs for the concept. But neither can I dismiss the possibility that the term itself had no Marxist implications for several decades before Lukacs came along, in which case the term has been co-opted by Marxists to the extent that they (like Leiter) assert the "correct" use as a Marxist one.
Either way I suspect Leiter's annoyance re: "incorrect" use is not justified by linguistic history, except to the extent he is complaining about people talking about reification in Marxist contexts without using the term in Lukacs' sense (which doesn't appear to be the case, from this blog entry, but I am doing a lot of reading between the lines). Some of you speak German and some of you read Marx and some of you have access to fancy corpus databases... any chance one of you knows, or can find, the first English or German print instance of "reification?"
The most common response to "AI took my job" is "don't worry, soon the AI will take everyone's jobs, then we'll all have UBI and we won't have to work anymore." The basic thesis is that after the advent of AGI, we will enter a post-scarcity era. But, we still have to deal with the fact that we live on a planet with a finite amount of space and a finite number of physical resources, so it's hard to see how we could ever get to true post-scarcity. Why don't more people bring this up? Has anyone written about this before?
Let's say we're living in the post-scarcity era and I want a Playstation 5. Machines do all the work now, so it should be a simple matter of going to the nearest AI terminal and asking it to whip me up a Playstation 5, right? But what if I ask for BB(15) Playstation 5's? That's going to be a problem, because the machine could work until the heat death of the universe and still not complete the request. I don't even have to ask for an impossibly large number - I could just ask for a smaller but still very large number, one that is in principle achievable but will tie up most of the earth's manufacturing capacity for several decades. Obviously, if there are no limits on what a person can ask for, then the system will be highly vulnerable to abuse from bad actors who just want to watch the world burn. Even disregarding malicious attacks, the abundance of free goods will encourage people to reproduce more, which will put more and more strain on the planet's ability to provide.
This leads us into the idea that a sort of command economy will be required - post-scarcity with an asterisk. Yes, you don't have to work anymore, but in exchange, there will have to be a centralized authority that will set rules on what you can get, and in what amounts, and when. Historically, command economies haven't worked out too well. They're ripe for political abuse and tend to serve the interests of the people who actually get to issue the commands.
I suppose the response to this is that the AI will decide how to allocate resources to everyone. Its decisions will be final and non-negotiable, and we will have to trust that it is wise and ethical. I'm not actually sure if such a thing is possible, though. Global resource distribution may simply remain a computationally intractable problem into the far future, in which case we would end up with a hybrid system where we would still have humans at the top, distributing the spoils of AI labor to the unwashed masses. I'm not sure if this is better or worse than a system where the AI was the sole arbiter of all decisions. I would prefer not to live in either world.
I don't put much stock in the idea that a superhuman AI will figure out how to permanently solve all problems of resource scarcity. No matter how smart it is, there are still physical limitations that can't be ignored.
TL;DR the singularity is more likely to produce the WEF vision of living in ze pod and eating ze bugs, rather than whatever prosaic Garden of Eden you're imagining.
Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Posted because I didn't see Zorba post one today. Feel free to delete if that's an issue.
This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
I know there are some other sports fans on here, and I thought a discussion thread might be fun, and Monday is the natural day coming after the weekend football (both varieties) games and without a side thread scheduled. What's going on with your favorite teams/players/etc? What fun media controversies in the microcosm of sports can tell us something about the broader world? What culture war bullshit do you want to discuss in a sporting context?
The Wednesday Wellness threads are meant to encourage users to ask for and provide advice and motivation to improve their lives. It isn't intended as a 'containment thread' and any content which could go here could instead be posted in its own thread. You could post:
Requests for advice and / or encouragement. On basically any topic and for any scale of problem.
Updates to let us know how you are doing. This provides valuable feedback on past advice / encouragement and will hopefully make people feel a little more motivated to follow through. If you want to be reminded to post your update, see the post titled 'update reminders', below.
Advice. This can be in response to a request for advice or just something that you think could be generally useful for many people here.
Encouragement. Probably best directed at specific users, but if you feel like just encouraging people in general I don't think anyone is going to object. I don't think I really need to say this, but just to be clear; encouragement should have a generally positive tone and not shame people (if people feel that shame might be an effective tool for motivating people, please discuss this so we can form a group consensus on how to use it rather than just trying it).
I'm curious about not just what your favorite post is, but also what you think is the GOAT, or perhaps what you think is most illustrative and representative of this space (e.g. what would you show someone to get them intrigued). Please limit your post to only ONE pick and briefly explain why you chose it. This can be from anywhere within the Motte's history thus far, and r/TheThread is a good place to check in case you're having trouble finding something. Asking for a friend.
Be advised; this thread is not for serious in depth discussion of weighty topics, this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
Figured I'd make my first-ever thread on this new site, so:
There's a Ross Scott video about a lawsuit that game developer/publisher Atlus has brought against people maintaining a server emulator for their dead MMO, SMT: Imagine Online.
One notable aspect here is that Ross approaches this with the attitude that there exists an alternative world where Atlus is instead on the business end of lawfare, a world where consumer rights is the dominant paradigm instead of our world, where corporate rights and welfare are given more priority. Notably, Ross even uses the phrase "Overton Window."
(Side bar: Compared to previous videos where he's talked about the subject of dead games (i.e. a game that has been rendered unplayable/inaccessible by a developer or publisher, typically in the form of MMOs and any other game that relys on an internet connection to a central server), this video feels a bit more "political" compared to those. Or, at least, it carries more of a Culture War scent than previous videos. Ross's discussion on these topics could have, and probably still could, be described as "apolitical" ranting not uncommon in the pre-GamerGate era, when dunking on gaming corporations was something that "tits-n'-beer liberals" could do without pushback.)
Now, I recognize that for many posters here, rejecting the dominant frame of the Overton Window is nothing new. It arguably goes back at least as far as Ken Kesey and the Merry Pranksters, and in the modern Culture War, subscribing to different frames or substituting your own reality is a driver of the "two movies" effect. But Ross's more playful usage of rejecting the frame almost resembles a sort of role-play--it's just something he does, along the same lines as him off-handedly claiming to live on the moon in his Game Dungeon series. Now, of course, this is just Ross Scott's unique brand of weirdness, but at the same time, it got me wondering:
How effective/convincing could one be if they acted or lived according to the frame they wanted to live under? There's been discussions that have touched upon LARPing, cheap talk, and being the change you want to see in the world. I imagine most socialists/communists of today are already mostly there, casually throwing out memes of the left and not batting an eye. What other not-so-polarized/politicized issues, besides games preservation, could be pushed forwards by alternate-reality-mindset? Nuclear energy? YIMBY-ism? Or does everyone just know the hard difference between an is and an ought, and this post is mostly redundant?
Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
This is the Quality Contributions Roundup. It showcases interesting and well-written comments and posts from the period covered. If you want to get an idea of what this community is about or how we want you to participate, look no further (except the rules maybe--those might be important too).
As a reminder, you can nominate Quality Contributions by hitting the report button and selecting the "Actually A Quality Contribution!" option. Additionally, links to all of the roundups can be found in the wiki of /r/theThread which can be found here. For a list of other great community content, see here.
These are mostly chronologically ordered, but I have in some cases tried to cluster comments by topic so if there is something you are looking for (or trying to avoid), this might be helpful. Here we go:
Contributions for the week of August 29, 2022
Identity Politics:
- "Once the victim responds everything turns to picking apart their defense and hounding them for it."
Contributions for the week of September 5, 2022
Identity Politics:
Contributions for the week of September 12, 2022
In the Land of Mordor Where the Shadows Lie:
Identity Politics:
Contributions for the week of September 19, 2022
Identity Politics:
Contributions for the week of September 26, 2022
Identity Politics:
Quality Contributions in the Main Subreddit
The Wednesday Wellness threads are meant to encourage users to ask for and provide advice and motivation to improve their lives. It isn't intended as a 'containment thread' and any content which could go here could instead be posted in its own thread. You could post:
Requests for advice and / or encouragement. On basically any topic and for any scale of problem.
Updates to let us know how you are doing. This provides valuable feedback on past advice / encouragement and will hopefully make people feel a little more motivated to follow through. If you want to be reminded to post your update, see the post titled 'update reminders', below.
Advice. This can be in response to a request for advice or just something that you think could be generally useful for many people here.
Encouragement. Probably best directed at specific users, but if you feel like just encouraging people in general I don't think anyone is going to object. I don't think I really need to say this, but just to be clear; encouragement should have a generally positive tone and not shame people (if people feel that shame might be an effective tool for motivating people, please discuss this so we can form a group consensus on how to use it rather than just trying it).
By request, I am crossposting my post on becoming a German citizen for discussion here.
Hello fellow Mottizans, I have emerged from my lurker cave to share good news with you all: I have become a German citizen! But not through naturalization or birth; I used an uncommon route with a new and somewhat strange process: a StAG section (§) 5 declaration. While going through this, I had learned a lot about that citizenship laws of Germany and some comparisons with other countries, as well as spending (too much) time browsing various expat and citizenship forums and subreddits. I’d like to subject you to share with you what I’ve learned in this weird journey, through intergenerational citizenship and questions of national identity.
Background
With so many immigrants out there, why should you listen to me, an American moving between western countries? Well, I, personally, value it more when people put in effort for something with less assured payoff; few want to split lottery tickets, everyone wants to split the winnings. Similarly, I moved to Germany as someone with only German heritage, as a normal immigrant, and then more than a year after that a new law offered me a privileged path to citizenship through legal magic. In short, I committed to Germany and then received the winning lottery ticket.
A bit more about my path: I moved to Germany in 2020 with the EU Blue Card for highly qualified immigrants. I chose Germany because part of my family was from Germany, and in the typical American style I considered myself German-American. I had visited Germany and liked it, although I knew visiting and living somewhere are two very different things. But what I would really like to stress is that visiting Germany felt like visiting a home, a place that felt natural. I’ve visited plenty of other countries, and everywhere else it was clear that they were foreign, “alien” countries. It was obvious when I was in Japan that no matter how much I might like visiting castles or eating ramen, Japan would remain a foreign country. When it was unclear whether I would be still working in Germany, a friend suggested that I work with them in the Netherlands, and a big hangup was that the Netherlands was a foreign country, this despite the fact that they speak more English and I would be around more English-speaking expats. Germany was the ancestral homeland, and no other country could ever replace that.
German citizenship is based primarily on jus sanguinis, citizenship by blood: someone is a German citizen at birth because their parents were citizens. But this was, in the past, primarily patrilineal. In fact, the German citizenship in my family was cut off when my German grandmother married a foreigner: she automatically lost her German citizenship, rendering her stateless and all her children non-Germans, including my father, and all of her grandchildren were not German either, including me.
In August 2021 Germany passed an amendment to the Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz (StAG), or nationality law. The new StAG § 5 allows those who, to quote the federal authority, “were previously excluded by gender-discriminatory regulations from acquiring German citizenship at birth may now acquire it by way of declaration. Briefly, the post-war German Basic Law (a constitution) forbids gender discrimination, and so those who were excluded from acquiring citizenship due to this gender discrimination could claim it back; for example, until 1975, German women would not pass down citizenship by default. The process is new enough that the relevant authority here in Germany, in a major city, did not know about it. But I collected all of our old documents, submitted my application, and now (as of the time of writing) the certificate is in the mail in hand!
I did it, I became a German citizen! I did not naturalize, I gained citizenship through declaration (queue up, “I didn’t say citizenship, I declared it!”). I did not have to reside in Germany for 6-8 years, I did not have to speak German, pass any test, pay any money or do anything at all but submit a few documents and citizenship was handed down in a puff of magical legal smoke by a bureaucrat I’ve never met before. If I suffered some brain damage I could commit terrorism or racially motivated crimes, things that would have excluded me before, and still keep the citizenship (I don’t think I’ll test that though). And my children will also be German citizens from birth, and their children, and so on forever, just as it had been passed down to me from forever ago (well, at least since 1871).
But importantly, I haven’t been saying that I became German. I don’t speak German, I didn’t grow up in Germany, and neither did my parents. By the Basic Law, I am a German because I hold German citizenship, but I try to look past the purely legal standing. I don’t think the idea of who is German has a really clear and universal answer; different people and different Germans give different answers. Perhaps we can talk about the traits of Germans, but until we have access to the pure and perfect German Form, arguments are really all we can get. I will reference that concept of being a German plenty though, and the legal vs. cultural German.
That gives my background and stake in the matter, and it will make for a nice dinner party story but isn’t that important. In fact, nothing really changes legally for me anyway, my permit covered it all before. I think it’s much more interesting to talk about what I’ve learned along the way, as it might actually be interesting and useful for everyone else. So here it goes!
The Strangeness of Descent Laws
German citizenship by descent is a mess, but it’s interesting to take a little dip into the law. Before I only said that German citizenship is based on descent, which glosses over many of the complications that arise in tracing that path. A nice guide on the process can be found here. The US (and most countries in the Americas) use primarily jus soli or birthright citizenship, i.e. you are a citizen of a country if you are born in that country, but also has citizenship by descent. But it’s much more restrictive; in particular, while German citizenship by descent is basically limitless, US citizenship by descent requires that if e.g. the child has two citizen parents, at least one resided in the US at any point, or if only one parent is a US citizen they must have resided in the US for at least five years. I call this a “sunset clause” in citizenship, something that terminates citizenship automatically without a connection to the home country.
Without a solid sunset clause in the German citizenship by descent, you get some (in my personal view) strange lines of descent. Someone whose great-great-great-grandfather left Germany in the late 1800s can be a German citizen directly if it happens to pass only through the male line in key years. Compare this to someone whose German mother married a foreigner and they were born in 1948; their path to citizenship would be under StAG §14, and they have to establish a close connection to Germany, such as speaking German and having close family members in Germany. Here we see that you can only be a legal German if you establish that you are already a cultural German. Add on to this complications such as if your parents naturalized before or after you were born, if you served in a foreign military, if you every voluntarily gained citizenship of another country, and it gets complicated. To note, Germany has added a sunset clause: if a German citizen is born abroad after 1999, any of their children born abroad only retain German citizenship if the authorities are notified before the child’s first birthday. No more surprise citizenships by descent a hundred years down the line.
All of this has led to a lot of people sorting through old paperwork to find out if they are secretly German citizens or can become one. I like to point to the growth of /r/GermanCitizenship as part of it, but the perhaps better known example is for Italy, where it is popular enough to have consular wait times in years and a CNN article about it. I’ll just voice my personal opinion that all of this is a little strange to me; when one out of sixteen or thirty-two of your ancestors at a particular level came from a particular country, it’s hard for me to see where exactly your connection comes in. The legal case may be perfectly fine, but the cultural part falls through. I normally see it chalked up to “honoring ancestors” or “keeping their memory alive,” which turns into an excuse to have a nice passport and travel the EU visa-free as far as I’ve seen.
And I should mention that Germany, in principle, discourages dual citizenship. If you naturalize, you normally must give up other citizenships, if it is possible and doesn’t cause undue hardship. Notably, the fees to renounce US citizenship are high enough that the authorities may permit you to keep US citizenship if you make less per month than the fees, $2,350. It also permits dual citizenship if other citizenships were gained automatically, i.e. from birthright. There are many exceptions nowadays, but the principle still exists, and causes problems sometimes when e.g. people are forced to choose a nationality.
Finally, I will point out that StAG §5 vs. §14 (post- vs. pre- Basic Law) seems weird to me. A German woman could lose her citizenship by marrying a foreigner in e.g. 1947, have a child in 1948 then one in 1950; the first would have to prove their ties to Germany, while the second would get in without any restrictions, but in both cases the relevant legal situation that caused the loss of citizenship is the same and only stopped in 1950(ish). For the second child, the claim would be that because the Basic Law forbids gender discrimination, they were unfairly discriminated because they should have been able to obtain citizenship from a female parent. I’m not a jurist but the legal idea seems fraught: how could laws prohibiting an action in the future justify retroactive corrections? But §5 covers much more than that, affecting people born as late as 1993.
But the biggest takeaway from all of this is that I have the impression that citizenship laws oftentimes are capricious and arbitrary, relying on old documents that some may or may not have and offering various paths or restrictions that change over time. Countries try to both preserve a legal basis for citizenship while trying to reasonably restrict it, while working under changing social views and massive changes in the way the world works.
I think a look at the citizenship laws is helpful mostly to find out that they don’t really answer anything but a legal question, which is important but not what I’m after. I hope no one thinks that someone born to a German mother and a foreign father in 1974 is definitely not a citizen while a sibling born in 1976 definitely is, even if the legal situation is clear.
The Reddit Expatriation Community
That’s enough about citizenship laws then. I was fascinated by (potential) immigrants, especially on Reddit, that I came across in my browsing. As an American, I grew up with the idea that America was the land of immigration and that immigration only really flowed one-way. I think the statistics bears this out, with the US having one of the lowest shares of its population living abroad. Why would someone leave the freest and richest country?
I feel like this is changing, slowly. As other countries become richer, it becomes less clear that America is the automatic best option, and it is probably easier; I can do things like videocall my parents every week and translate written text on my phone, things that make it vastly easier to emigrate. And let’s be clear, the advantage of being a natural Anglophone is huge. On Reddit, which I think is primarily dominated by Americans and Anglophones in general, some of the migration-focused subreddits have seen a lot of growth: Amerexit, iwantout,and expats. Those are my three favorite (or at least most entertaining) subreddits, and they run the gamut from “America sucks, I want to leave!” to “How can I leave my current country (serious answers only)?” to “Living in a foreign country sucks in so many ways.” Pick your favorite, I guess. And like in everything else, politics is the mind-poison in immigration. But there are many common themes; I’ll reference posts without linking to avoid inter-subreddit drama.
I think most of these immigrants, and probably most immigrants in general, are what I would call “materialist immigrants.” Most people are looking to improve their economic situation or living standards. How they rate these things is up to them; someone may value high salaries directly, while others value more consistent healthcare coverage or walkable neighborhoods. If they’re from a western country they may consider themselves (and others like them) an expat instead of an immigrant, but it all amounts to the same thing. Even that German citizenship guide I linked before explains the benefits of becoming a German citizen in almost purely economic terms: live and work in the EU! Travel visa-free in so many places with a German passport! Go to university for free! If you’re destitute, Germany will take care of you! Drawbacks: none, you don’t have to learn German or pay any taxes or do anything at all for anyone else.
And the discussions reflect this living-standard/economic focus, and an entirely Ameri-centric view. Currently in /r/AmerExit, someone is hating on the US because… (checks subreddit) they can find cheap mineral water while on vacation in Italy. No, I’m not joking, it’s the first point in a top post at the time of writing. Someone may fear American politics enough to instead move to Turkey, a country that literally went through an attempted military coup in 2016 and has a nice book review regarding Erdogan-as-dictator on ACX. Or a contemporary favorite, overlooking the fact that many countries have more strict abortion laws than some US states.
When looking for somewhere to go, I see so often that people think of moving to completely different countries, treating them all the same as if “western European” covered everything they need. One person might say Germany and… Wales? How about the Netherlands, Spain, Italy, Germany, France or the UK? Another might want to move to Ireland or Scandinavia, but they speak fluent Spanish. Countries are interchangeable, as long as they have some greenery, good weather and everyone there aligns with their values. Everyone is “willing to learn the language,” a completely costless declaration that I always translate to, “I may learn to swim if you throw me in the middle of the ocean.” Even at the end of the natural process, I can see someone declare that they are finally an “EU citizen” after eight years as if their citizenship was granted by Brussels and not their home country.
Beyond the standard internet/Reddit stupidity, these feel like they cover an individualist- and money-focused worldview. And it naturally feeds materialist immigration that disregards the people who actually live in these places, which causes critical problems in adjusting to a life in a foreign country. Remember what I said about /r/expats? It’s the opposite version of /r/AmerExit, where people have gone to a foreign country and found that, yeah, it’s not America. This is what happens in the culture-clash. The day-to-day reality of living in a country that sees the sun for a few hours a day in the winter sets in. Of dealing with people who will always treat you like a foreigner. Of being far away from family and former friends. It’s tough to live somewhere far away from home, and it’s tough to know that before you actually make the move.
But… why is it tough? I haven’t seen many expats complaining about their jobs, most complain about the people around them and their social life. And the world seems very thoroughly Americanized: I visit American-style department stores, see advertisements in English, I can almost always ask to speak English with people, it all sounds very convenient to and for me. They have the healthcare and sparkling water they so desperately desired. What’s missing? Why can’t they assimilate?
Part 2 follows.