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 -
The penalty for speeding is already death, when people who can't drive as well as they think they can try to speed, overtake, drive in bad conditions, etc. But still there are fuckwits who do this, and even if there was an official "break the posted speed limits, death" penalty, you would still get fuckwits doing it because "Hey, maybe the cops aren't out on this stretch of road/I can slow down in time to fool the cameras/I'm good enough to get away with it" and so forth.
We have had the death penalty for as long as we've had any kind of legal system or laws, and that didn't discourage anyone. There may be an argument that without the death penalty, we would have had even more killings and murders, but having the death penalty did and does not mean "zero murders".
And what about the criminals who break into cars or even steal cars, but are not drug addicts? By the same logic, there is no way to prevent this despite any level of policing and surveillance, so do we throw up our hands and give them free stuff too? "Joe only steals and lies and cheats and defrauds because he's a poor heroin addict, if he got free heroin he'd never do that stuff". Yes, he would. Give Joe enough free heroin to maintain himself, where 'if I take more, I'll overdose' and Joe will look for other drugs to get that high that he can't get anymore from heroin. So unless we commit to giving Joe a range of free, pure drugs, then he'll go right back to robbing and stealing to feed his habit. There is a risk of methadone addiction and overdose, because junkies chase that high and will try anything, even if they're on something specifically prescribed to treat opioid addiction.
"Jim isn't an addict but he breaks into cars, robs, steals, cheats, and defrauds because he's a career criminal. If we only gave him free shit then he wouldn't do that any more". Would you recommend this policy, also?
More options
Context Copy link