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 -
It's apparently ok to file charges against people who are likely innocent because then they might sue the people who are actually responsible for this situation and then maybe those settlements will encourage better behavior from the government...you do see how convoluted that is, right?
The guy DeSantis picked to run Office of Election Crimes and Security explicitly told local election officials this wasn't their fault. It's the state government that is in charge of parsing through all the relevant records and giving a final answer to local officials. If this is an issue worth putting people in jail over why isn't DeSantis prosecuting his own administration officials? There's an obvious conflict of interest here, which I would think would severely undercut the idea that DeSantis' was acting in good faith when he chose to make a spectacle of these random people's arrests. I've explained what I believe DeSantis is doing — he's prosecuting these people to scare the hell out of any felon from even thinking about getting their voting rights reinstated, to appease his supporters who still believe in delusional election fraud theories, and also to distract from the problems his own government has in implementing Amendment 4 — and you haven't disavowed me of those beliefs. What do you think I'm missing?
Never said anything about it being 'okay.'
I am, this entire time, trying to get you to see why this is not a 'bewildering' action, and is in fact motivated by a rational goal which is being carried out in an entirely rational way.
You are imputing morality into the matter, I'm pointing out that moral or not, this is very clearly serving Desantis' end goals, and it isn't costing much to do it.
I've had this exact back-and-forth like 5 times now.
Most recently regarding the migrant flights.
And when he removed a state attorney from office.
Also regarding the Reedy Creek Kerfuffle vs. Disney.
and just before that on the "Don't Say Gay" issue.
Before that it was his Covid policy.
Every single time, I point out that this 'stupid' or 'self-defeating' action by Desantis actually has clear motivation and goals that are simply beyond the object-level. Sending 50 migrants to Martha's Vineyard isn't, itself, a solution to an illegal immigration crisis. So either he's stupid for trying it, OR HE HAS DIFFERENT GOALS THAN YOU ARE ASCRIBING TO HIM.
I note that Desantis is 'winning' along every single metric that would matter to him, he's about to win his re-election, and he is and continues to be a front-runner for the 2024 Presidential election. His state continues to have more people moving there. Maybe this will change in 2023 and all these efforts will 'finally' backfire on him. Probably not.
I am trying to explain how your model of Desantis and his behavior is clearly missing something.
I don't care if you think he's doing the moral or right thing. I can even disagree with what he's doing. But it's been obvious to me for a long time that he's not fighting like a normal politician and thus it would be a mistake to model him as one.
I have been ready to accept that what DeSantis is doing is trying to scare felons from voting, in a bid to improve his electoral chances. I think that's the most likely explanation. I was keeping my mind open and looking for something less uncharitable.
This is exactly what I'm talking about.
My friend. His electoral chances have literally never been in doubt.
He's currently sitting at 95% chance of victory on Predictit. his odds never went below 90%. Republicans have gained the lead in voter registrations in Florida, and have expanded it in the past year.
Even FiveThirtyEight has him up almost EIGHT FUCKING POINTS.
This man is NOT worried about winning this next election. And since he's not, he can look far beyond that.
You think he's trying to boost his own chances, and missing that if he can successfully deter fraud throughout the state, this potentially boosts his friends and allies.
Did you notice how he has backed a bunch of people for election to Local School boards? That's not about helping him get re-elected. That's about ensuring his team's policies are implemented throughout the state.
Do you not get that he is capable of considering goals beyond merely benefiting 'himself' personally?
The fun part is I can point all this out to you and it won't make a bit of difference in the long run. If he wins POTUS, it will be because all his opponents were simply unable to see the actual nature of the threat he posed.
Your response is not dispositive. I'm saying he's trying to shore up his electoral chances by discouraging people from voting and you're saying his election chances are already high. Neither is mutually exclusive.
What I am finding frustrating about this exchange is the lack of clarity. I'm referring to how the felon voter right restoration process is a mess and you're talking about "voter fraud" as if the two things were the same. They're not. I try to be precise with the language I use so I find it really confusing when you resort to genericized vocabulary.
I'm sure that you believe that.
I've explained this logic six times now, counting previous Desantis actions, and wasn't expecting it to go much differently this time.
I'm sure people will still be questioning it when he's being sworn in as President.
Do normal politicians expend extra efforts 'shoring up' elections when they are confident of victory?
Why would they?
The messiness of restoring felon voter rights doesn't seem to change a single thing about what happened here.
Felons had their right to vote restored before the 2020 election.
Michael Bloomberg spent millions paying fines to enable Felons to vote that year
The GOP saw massive gains that year anyway.
So hey, I can agree that we need clarity for felons who want to know if they are legally permitted to vote.
I don't think that the government is particularly worried about Felons voting.
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
More options
Context Copy link