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 had a weird moment last night of, perhaps, perceiving my own bubble. So I have to ask to verify...
Does anyone actually believe Biden is the president? I don't mean in an election integrity sense. I mean, does anyone actually believe he is the one steering the federal government or making decisions? I could whole heartedly believe Obama was the Commander in Chief. I had zero doubt George W Bush was in command of the highest Executive Office. Sure, Trump seemed to be at war with his own staff half the time, but he ostensibly tried to exercise the power of his office.
Biden seems like he just gets wheeled out to mumble some words of a teleprompter about once a month. He gets 8/10 of them correct, adlibs something he shouldn't have, and then his handlers come out the next day and "correct" his statements. It just strains my imagination to think he is in charge of crafting policy or executive decisions at all.
Then again, I have heard commentary that he's a bit of a control freak, and wants to have final say in every decision, which is why his administration basically floundered for the first year and a half. He refused to delegate and was a major bottleneck. Supposedly reporters covering him over the years, on various campaign trails, have seen this sort of behavior first hand.
So I donno, am I operating somewhere out on the fringes with this notion? Is there anybody here who fully believes Biden is every bit the President in full possession of the authority of his office that Obama or George Bush (either) were? Can you tell me why?
I have heard "this President is an empty suit controlled by the real people in charge" for literally every President of my life.
Biden is the first one I actually believe it. Not completely, because he definitely did the Afghanistan withdrawal over his staff's objections.
It does seem like a popular fringe belief in my memory, at least, though I don't remember it getting much traction for most of the presidents (Bush I, Clinton, Obama, Trump) I'm old enough to remember. Bush II was the only one for whom things like "he's just Karl Rove's and/or Dick Cheney's puppet" actually seemed widely believed.
I'm not sure how believable these things should be, just because the prior based on history examined in hindsight is so tiny. The only example I can think of where this category of conspiracy theory might have been true is that some historians think Edith Wilson might have been de facto president after Woodrow's stroke, at least during his worst periods. Centuries of presidents and just one positive example? Even among the people who think Reagan's descent towards Alzheimer's was beginning before his presidency ended, they don't seem to think his wife or advisors were making decisions for him.
I'm old enough (if only just) to have clear memories of Reagan as President and even a snot-nosed 10-year-old like me could tell that he was fading during his last year in office. That said I get the impression that pretty much everyone in his administration was on the same program so to speak and that to the degree that folks were exceeding their authority it often was more to "cover for the old man" than to promote their own agendas (lots of talk about what the president had actually known about and signed off on during the contra hearings). In contrast I don't think there was any genuine doubt about whether Bush I and the Clinton's were setting their own agenda (yes there was a lot of talk about Hillary wearing the pants in the relationship, but that, but that strikes me as a bit different). There was a lot of talk early on about Bush II being the brain-dead thrall of his father's old associate (Dick Cheney) but that my recollection is that line of argument didn't survive his first term.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link