site banner
ZorbaTHut  1yr ago (text post)   31256 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 17, 2022

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.

16
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Steve Bannon Sentenced to 4 Months in Prison Archive link

The infamous, triple-shirted, right-wing political provocateur was sentenced Friday for defying the Congressional investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection. He was also fined $6,500.

Bannon faced a maximum possible two years under the law. Prosecutors had asked the judge for six months, which was the longest sentence they could request in accordance with federal sentencing guideline calculations that account for the broader circumstances of the case. Bannon’s attorneys had asked Judge Carl Nichols for probation.

Bannon’s forthcoming stint in prison could be just the start of a new life behind bars for the longtime Trump ally, however. That’s because Bannon’s also defending himself in a much more serious financial fraud case in New York, in which he’s accused of ripping off Trump supporters who donated funds for an allegedly-sham charity to build a private wall on the U.S.-Mexico border.

In the New York case, Bannon faces as much as 15 years of incarceration for just the most serious of his five alleged felonies.

Interesting how the state fraud change for his wall scam, which affected average individuals, has a waaaayyy worse max punishment than the contempt of Congress charge, which affects one of the highest offices of the land. Same for contempt of court, tax evasion...pretty much anything except treason or espionage is punished less severely than basic fraud. It's one of the quirks of the criminal justice system that fraud against an individual or company is not uncommonly punished way worse than defying the fed. government.

Trump pardoned Bannon for the fraud case on a federal level, but this does not apply to state charges. However, if found guilty, he could be eligible parole, because it's state, unlike the federal charge, so that's good news for him I guess.

It's one of the quirks of the criminal justice system that fraud against an individual or company is not uncommonly punished way worse than defying the fed. government.

Fraud against an individual or company is less important but it is easier to hide. I think the rational punishment is proportional to b/p where b is the benefit for the criminal and p the probability to get caught. If you have 50% chance to be caught stealing a 100$ bike, the punishment for that should be roughly 200$ so that on average you get nothing. If you put it at 100$ stealing bikes is a profitable business model.

I think it is assumed that people do not get much benefit through the contempt of Congress/court, and get caught quite easily. On tax evasion, the explanation might be different.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats