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 -
Some signs that maybe this Trump administration won't just be more of the same...
So apparently the US government will "shut down" on Friday if Congress doesn't pass a continuing resolution. (I put "shut down" in quotes because of course they will still continue the all-important business of sending out transfer payments and paying bureaucrats. Mostly they'll just close the National Parks.).
To keep the government running, the House Speaker (Mike Johnson, Republican) put forward a 1500 page continuing resolution that had all kinds of ridiculous shit in it, including funding pro-regime propaganda, changing the word "offender" to "justice-involved person", and of course a bunch of pork barrel projects for both parties.
A 1500 page bill right before Christmas is all very normal of course. No one expects the Congresspeople to read it. They just rubber stamp and then go home to their constituents bragging about their $100 million in funding for music tourism or whatever.
Only, this time, something happened. Spurred on by Elon and Vivek, constituents started calling their representatives and complaining. The bill looks to be in trouble. And now, reportedly, it is being replaced by a bill that's "only" 116 pages. At this point, our resident nitpickers will come in and mention that most of the important stuff in the bill is still there. The money for molasses research is just a small drop in the bucket compared to the money for hurricane relief. And they're right. But still, this is important progress. A government for the people and by the people needs to legible to the people.
Bills should be only as long as they need to be and no longer. This bill should have been a single page, continuing existing funding levels. 116 pages is still 115 pages too long, but it's progress.
It's a good sign that the swamp is less powerful than before.
p.s. Grok AI is very useful for getting information on current events.
Is this really a good thing for conservatives, though? For years I've heard them complain both about the length of bills and the power of the administrative state. The trouble is that if you insist on a shorter bill that does essentially the same thing as a longer one, what you're really doing is eliminating detail. If you're sticking to, say, Herman Cain's 9-page limit, what you're really doing is delegating to an agency with rulemaking authority.
Anyway, according to CNN as of 5 minutes ago, it looks like this new bill is dead. House conservatives balked at Trump's 2-year suspension of the debt ceiling, and there's nothing in it to entice Democrats. What we're seeing here is a repeat of the old divisions that made it impossible for the Republicans to elect a speaker last time around, and Massie has already said he's not voting for Johnson next year, so we might see a repeat of the McCarthy fiasco in the near future. Trump can take his victory lap, but it looks like the infighting that's dogged Republicans for a while isn't going anywhere. It's not inconceivable that the Democrats could tap one or two swing-district Republicans to vote for Jeffries in the name of ending the circus and getting down to business and deliver Trump an embarrassing defeat before he even takes office (it doesn't help that he raided the House for some of his appointments).
It's a good thing for the nation, not necessarily for conservatives. 1500 page omnibus spending bills in lieu of a simple continuing resolution are bad, actually. NormanRockwellFreeSpeech.jpg
From a politics perspective, any Republicans who cross the aisle to vote for Jeffries are 100% getting primaried, so that won't happen. But we'll see if old school Republicans like Mike Johnson continue to bend the knee now that business-as-usual has been threatened. In any case, the point of winning elections is to use power. If you don't do anything because you're afraid of the backlash, there is no point. Better to try and fail than not to try.
It's unlikely, but getting primaried isn't as much of a concern as some make it out to be. Primary threats only work for safe seats. If the district is competitive, sure, the Republicans can try a primary challenge, but an extreme partisan is dead in the water in the general.
No, the MAGA people are willing to engage in spite, risking a seat to primary someone.
More options
Context Copy link
Sure.. But they're still getting primaried. In the house at least. Susan Collins is probably safe.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link