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 have previously discussed why I think the anti-death penalty stance is not just incorrect, but evil. This morning, I have received news that what I consider the most pro-crime administration of my lifetime has done something that I thought was unthinkable, and has commuted the death penalty sentences of 37 of the 40 federal death row inmates:
I am, as they say, triggered. For an administration filled with pro-crime sentiments and excuse-making for evil people, this probably tops the charts. I am disgusted by Biden's handlers. Here's the list of federal death row inmates. Absolutely none of the usual reasons for opposing the death penalty even begin to make sense for these guys. People worry about sentencing someone that's wrong accused to death - did they get it wrong in these examples?
They just somehow accidentally tabbed the wrong guy for murdering a prison guard? Really could have been anyone? Or perhaps you're concerned that it should only be reserved for the worst people, which is why Roof has to go. OK:
I'd love to hear the explanation for the parents of that preteen girl why their child's life wasn't every bit as sacred as the victims of Bowers and Roof. Why does he deserve a commutation? Perhaps it's because she was just an individual, so her life doesn't really deserve to be repaid with retributive justice, in contrast to Roof's victims. On an intuitive level, almost everyone knows that Dylann Roof deserves to die and that the only miscarriage of justice will be that it takes decades of fighting with demonic attorneys to get it done. Somehow, a bunch of otherwise decent people have convinced themselves that while Roof is sufficiently evil that he just deserves to die, there are probably a bunch of other death row inmates that don't. I believe this is because they're just not aware of the facts of those cases. Let's look at one of the commuted sentences:
How many people, knowing that information, would say that it's important for the President to spare these guys from execution?
There is no coalition that I have more sincere contempt for than people that spend their lives trying to avoid the execution of men like Kadamovas. There are so many issues where I grant a difference in preferences, values, evaluations of policies, or genuine mistakes. On this one, I am just sincerely angry at everyone that disagrees with me. The Biden administration has done so many things that I disagree with, but most of them still fall into that category of normal political disagreements. Denying the victims of these crimes the only justice that could have been done is evil.
To be fair he should do this if you believe that politicians should try to live up to their campaign pledges. This is from 2020:
"Eliminate the death penalty. Over 160 individuals who’ve been sentenced to death in this country since 1973 have later been exonerated. Because we cannot ensure we get death penalty cases right every time, Biden will work to pass legislation to eliminate the death penalty at the federal level, and incentivize states to follow the federal government’s example. These individuals should instead serve life sentences without probation or parole."
Biden has been against the death penalty for some time, but was unable to eliminate it entirely. He should probably do it for all 40, but the 3 he hasn't are obviously problematic from the POV of some of his supporters, so he has compromised somewhat. That part can be critiqued if you like, but he has a democratic mandate to minimize the death penalty.
Whatever you think of it, he was democratically elected with a public stance against the federal death penalty. Elections do have consequences. As they will when Trump takes over and is more zealous about the death penalty. So it goes.
For what it is worth I am reliably informed Biden himself was pushing for this, while many of his advisors thought it would be a bad look for many of those on the list. In the end the compromise was to leave out the three who from a publicity pov were thought to be most problematic.
Also, many of your examples you are just axiomatically assuming they did get the conviction right. It is entirely possible (though not likely!) the wrong person was convicted. Why could a mistake not be made for the murder of a prison guard? Even just glancing over a few I see an example where one perp claims to have brain damage and another was inducted into dealing drugs at the age of 7, first arrested at 9 and was smoking crack before they were a teenager. You really can't see any reason why some people might think that even if they shouldn't be let free that maybe killing them is not helpful? That they might look at that person and think, they had no chance from the get go?
As well, part of the progressive stack argument is that the system will sometimes railroad individuals, and that law officers have been shown to sometimes lie to get convictions. Is your position there is absolutely zero chance one of these people is actually not guilty?
If you are angry about these people not being killed surely you must be aware there are people who are equally angry about the death penalty and would say that yes it is important for these people to be spared the death penalty. Thus it has no real bearing on anything beyond your own personal feelings. Whether you are angry about it or not has no bearing on whether it it is the right or wrong thing to do, or whether your argument is compelling or not.
I want to be clear, I am not against the death penalty myself. I think it is a useful tool when used judiciously. But I can certainly see why many people, Catholic or otherwise are against it in totality. I'm not angry at Trump for supporting more use of the death penalty and I am not angry at Biden for thinking it shouldn't be used. Both are reasonable understandable positions. Why be mad about that?
All the dumb stuff they say to pander to the base? No, that's the last thing I want them to do.
Unless they're pandering to me. In which case I'll be mad they didn't follow through.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link