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 -
Joe Biden made the following remarks:
First this guy is the gift that keeps on giving. I really suppose he lowkey wants to tank his party out of spite with juuust enough plausible deniability. Let's start with unpacking. First - he twists what was said - it was a comedian act making a joke, not a speaker. Subtle but important difference. Even Jon Stewart pitched on the controversy by saying - I find this guy funny something is wrong with me.
Second - this comes from the president, is not a part of comedy act, and the republicans decided to give democrats run for the pearl clutching gold. And without some charity there is no way to deflect (I do think personally that he meant the speakers of the rally, but let's be honest - he deserves exactly as much charity as Trump campaign and kill tony got).
Now the media didn't let it slide even if they gave him somewhat more charity. It's called gaffe, where as a comedian joke is taken at face value. But that is to be expected in a way.
Do you think this will affect meaningfully the election?
Since we're on the topic of the election, a question about betting odds from an almost complete n00b on the topic. Paddy Power is one of the biggest bookies in Ireland and the UK, and they're offering odds on the election outcome:
Am I tripping, or is something not adding up here? If they're placing Kamala as the favourite to win the election, surely any derivative bet from that conditional should also be the favourite, and vice versa. Why do they apparently think "Kamala wins the popular vote but Trump wins the election" is more likely to happen than not, but "Trump winning the election" is less likely to happen than not?
EDIT: Disregard, I get it now.
1/2 means you get half of your stake as winnings if you win, meaning it's roughly 66% to happen after the bookmaker's margin. Trump is currently the favorite to win the election.
Harris is favorite to win the popular vote but due to the US electoral system that is not the sole qualifier.
Yep, I get it now, I had it all backwards in my head because I'm very new at this. Thanks a lot!
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link