site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 6, 2025

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.

10
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Additionally, while white identitarians were correct to predict an exodus of conservative whites from racially-diverse liberal states, they probably did not anticipate that such whites would flee not to Whitopias such as Idaho and Montana, bu

Assuming that you've accurately represented Hanania's viewpoint here, he doesn't appear to fully understand the situation. On a county level, people move towards whiteness and away from blackness.

Sure, South Carolina has a lot of black people. But conservatives moving from California to South Carolina aren't going to be anywhere near them. They will be in a nice safe street somewhere else.

But even on a state level, Idaho is the second fastest growing state since 2010 after Mormon (and lily white) Utah.

At the same time, Taylor is still wrong. Because it's not about "being near your own people". It's about being near white people. Black and Hispanic people also migrate towards white areas. High trust societies rock.

It's about being near white people.

I don’t think this is true. It is about getting away from blacks, but most whites appear to have few if any qualms about moving to places like the Bay Area which have heavily Latino and Asian populations, but few blacks.

But there are massive economic reasons to go there, so they will deal with the diversity even if they don't like it.

Exactly. Here's a great blog article on the subject: https://arctotherium.substack.com/p/fleeing-opportunity

Diversity has killed growth because talented people are leaving the most productive areas. Throughout most of history, the opposite was true, with young dreamers coming to Rome, Paris, London, or New York to make their fortune. They still do, of course, but in much smaller numbers.

How bad is it? California has lost millions of citizens to domestic migration despite having by far the best climate and great economic opportunities. Imagine how bad things would be if they didn't have beaches, Hollywood, and Silicon Valley.

It's not all bad news though. Cities are IQ shedders, so in the long run, it's probably better if our best people leave the cities. Bad for economic growth, but good for demographics.

Diversity has killed growth because talented people are leaving the most productive areas.

Racial diversity is not even close to the primary reason why most people flee California. The extremely high cost of living, the massive homeless problem, the crumbling infrastructure, the punishing taxation, the piss-poor governance — all of these are far more salient than the number of Mexicans. (And California has a far lower black percentage than nearly any of the states — Texas, Florida, Virginia, North Carolina — to which Californians are mostly fleeing.)

Again, people are not moving to the black areas of those states.

You’re aware that black people can move around outside “their neighborhoods”, right? The neighborhood where I live isn’t heavily black in terms of the people who occupy houses here, but there are plenty of black people when I go to the grocery store, or to various public places. If a school district practices busing or has magnet schools, my children can have black students in their classes, even if we don’t live in a “black area”. Thus, the black percentage of the population is still relevant even if you feel like you can just move to “a white area”.

Yes, of course. People living in majority black neighborhoods move out a lot. It's a good idea for them to do so.

But majority black areas still exist, even if they bleed residents every year. Also, new majority black areas are constantly created as other groups leave.

I’m not even talking about “moving out”. I’m saying that black people, like anyone else, can do all sorts of things outside the neighborhoods where they live. Even ones who don’t move out of their neighborhoods can still cause problems and discomfort for people living in other neighborhoods.