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.

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I'm pretty optimistic; at least these things are happening out in the open in some way, at least these debates are being had. See also some exciting arguments happening in the field of education. So, of course I'm going to write about what could go wrong, as well as what I think has gone wrong.
The downside to politics being so thermostatic is that it seems like no matter how bad your policies are, voters will flip power back to you in a few years regardless, and you can go back to believing that the other guys are so awful that you don't have to bother learning how to actually accomplish things because that would be hard.
The center-left has been here before! After the last time the Democrats lost the popular vote, Dan Savage wrote "The Urban Archipelago", some of which seems charmingly dated ("If coal is to be burned, it has to be burned as cleanly as possible so as not to foul the air we all have to breathe") or sadly dated ("Unlike the people who flee from cities in search of a life free from disagreement and dark skin, we are for contentiousness, discourse, and the heightened understanding of life that grows from having to accommodate opposing viewpoints. We're for opposition."), but at its core, it's a marvelously audacious vision: liberals win when cities grow, so we should grow cities and make them amazing, and the only reason red states are red is because their cities aren't big and amazing enough.
This vision failed, and there's an excellent interview that David Roberts did on Volts, "Dan Savage on blue America in the age of Trump". Savage describes what the YIMBYs call "the unholy alliance":
Five years ago, I wrote about what I think is the most likely path forward, and what is the ideal path forward. I think my idea of that is a lot more detailed now, and ties in well with the idea of the Urban Archipelago. Here's my idea of what the blue team has failed to provide, and if they want to regain power and credibility, they have to solve that.
The Four Failures
Safety and Order
Josh Barro, "Trump Didn't Deserve to Win, But We Deserved to Lose":
Noah Smith, "The Blue Cities Must Be Fixed":
Matt Yglesias, "A Common Sense Democrat Manifesto":
To be clear, the problem is not violence, so far as I can tell. Murder is back down to its pre-COVID numbers, and never reached the bloody peaks of the 1990s. It's petty disorder. It's visible homelessness, which makes people sick and drives people who can afford alternatives from the public square.
Inclusion
This is vibes, and I am not good at vibes, but I do appreciate that there's something wrong with white people insulting other white people by calling them white, with pushing language like "Latinx" despite it being really unpopular with the people it's supposed to be helping, and with gleefully signing off on microaggressions against men (and against women if you include the adjective "white").
I don't have much to say about this, as it's really not my area of expertise, but the perception is absolutely that the blue team cares more about how many marginalized identities you can tick off than about your material circumstances.
This is kind of an outlier, as you can't just fix this by fixing local governance. But it's a real thing that people are upset about.
TracingWoodgrains:
Sarah McBride, being interviewed by Ezra Klein (archive):
Public Goods
This is definitely more to do with city governance. tl;dr, La Sombrita, but in more detail...
Barro:
Smith:
Jennifer Pahlka, "Curiosity and Conflict":
And it's not just this stuff! It's the San Francisco public school system failing to teach their kids to read, and then banning eighth-grade algebra for "equity" reasons. It's a focus on process over outcomes.
Fundamentally, it's a decision to retreat to the idea that "we followed the correct process" rather than testing whether or not the outcome was successful. The results are shameful and devastating, and they are a key reason why we see so much poverty amongst so much plenty.
This all has a lot to do with nuts-and-bolts stuff, mostly insane permitting issues (Texas doesn't install more solar power than California because Texans love the environment more; it's because California makes everything more difficult), coalition politics that mean everyone gets a slice of the salami (and sometimes there's no salami left), and an insistent disinterest in trying to see if you're actually doing something that will help, as opposed to visibly trying to help.
Concretely, I think the best examples here are public schools ("Government: At long last, we have created Harrison Bergeron from classic sci-fi story (Don't Create) Harrison Begeron"), safe public spaces (kinda overlaps with point one), and public transit.
Affordability
The two biggest expenses for most people are housing and transportation, which are inexorably linked. Blue cities in blue states have self-inflicted housing shortages, which are well-known and well-understood, and yet remain seemingly intractable, even as they exacerbate every other problem.
Barro:
Smith:
Jerusalem Demsas, "Blue States Gave Trump and Vance an Opening" (archive):
Ezra Klein, on The Weeds in late August/early September 2020 (lost the link, my apologies):
And that sums up exactly what has now come home to roost.
More options
Context Copy link