site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   36203 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 24, 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.

20
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

An update, largely for the sake of visibility, about my post below on January 6th defendants.

I received a number of very helpful responses pointing out some things I missed. I was wrong when I said @anti_dan 's claim about J6 defendants "held without bail for wandering in" was fictitious. At least three different people reasonably fit this qualification: Timothy Louis Hale-Cusanelli, Karl Dresch, Michael Curzio, and possibly others. All three had their bail denied, meaning they were going to remain behind bars no matter what, and no amount of money would get them released ahead of trial. Dresch and Curzio ended up getting released about 6 months later after pleading guilty to misdemeanors. Hale was convicted at trial and was sentenced to 48 months of prison.

The reasons why their pretrial release was unconditionally denied are not that surprising, especially in light of how unforgiving US legal standards are in this area. Hale was frantically trying to destroy evidence by deleting his accounts and disposing of clothing & javelin flag pole. His coworkers at the naval weapons base he had a security clearance for thought he was crazy because he'd regularly show up to work with a Hitler mustache and make holocaust jokes. Curzio spent 8 years in prison for attempted 1st degree murder conviction, and within two years of his release he perhaps demonstrated some poor judgment by traveling from Florida to be on the frontlines of the J6 riot. Dresch is someone whose case I wrote about before within the discussion of pretrial detention. He had bad criminal history (multiple law enforcement obstruction charges, and a number of felonies from when he led cops on a high-speed chase reaching speeds of 145mph) and despite his felony convictions, he was caught with multiple guns after J6.

So going back to @anti_dan 's original claim:

That you can be held without bail for wandering in, without them even proving that you knew it was illegal to be there (for most people the barricades had been long abandoned by the incompetent, Pelosi directed, Capitol Police), is Eugene Debbs shit.

In case you don't know, Debs was a prominent and unusually eloquent socialist (Freddie DeBoer is a big big fan) who was sentenced to ten years for sedition for protesting America's participation in WW1. If you've ever heard the phrase "can't yell fire in a crowded theater", it's because that was used by Oliver Wendell Holmes to justify the imprisonment of another socialist WW1 protestor in Schenck v. United States, and so Debs' SCOTUS appeal was rejected for the same reasons. First Amendment jurisprudence was pathetic back then.

I don't know if anti_dan still holds their belief on comparing some J6 defendants to Debs, but now that we have some identifiable cases of people who were held without bail for wandering in, perhaps this can prompt a more fruitful discussion on the legitimacy of this comparison. Some questions for everyone: Are you surprised by the reasons why these people were denied pretrial release? Is denial of their release indicative of politically-motivated retribution?

Here's the DoJ press release on Hale-Cusanelli's conviction:

New Jersey Man Sentenced to 48 Months in Prison for Actions Related to Capitol Breach

Defendant, an Army Reservist, Used Tactical Hand Signals and Commands as He and Other Rioters Entered the Building

      WASHINGTON – An Army reservist from New Jersey was sentenced today to 48 months in prison on felony and misdemeanor charges stemming from his actions during the breach of the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. His and others’ actions disrupted a joint session of the U.S. Congress convened to ascertain and count the electoral votes related to the presidential election.

       Timothy Louis Hale-Cusanelli, 32, of Colts Neck, New Jersey, was sentenced in the District of Columbia.

       According to the government’s evidence, Hale-Cusanelli drove to Washington on the morning of Jan. 6, 2021. He joined a mob of rioters that illegally breached a police line attempting to secure the Capitol grounds. He commanded others in the mob to “advance” on the Capitol, a command he continued once inside. Hale-Cusanelli was among the first rioters to enter the Capitol Building, moving inside shortly after the breach that took place at 2:12 p.m. at the Senate Wing Door. He made harassing and derogatory statements toward Capitol Police officers, saying that a “revolution” was coming. He remained in the building for approximately 40 minutes. Days after the incident, Hale-Cusanelli told a friend that being in the Capitol was “exhilarating,” he was hoping for a “civil war,” and that the “tree of liberty must be refreshed with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”

       At the time of the Capitol breach, Hale-Cusanelli was enlisted in the U.S. Army Reserves. Hale-Cusanelli worked as a contractor at a naval weapons station, where he had a “secret” security clearance, and has since been barred from the facility.

       Hale-Cusanelli was arrested on Jan. 15, 2021. He was found guilty by a jury on May 27, 2022, of a felony charge of obstruction of an official proceeding, and four related misdemeanors: entering and remaining in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly and disruptive conduct in a restricted building or grounds, disorderly conduct in a Capitol Building, and parading, demonstrating, or picketing in a Capitol Building. At sentencing today, the Court found that Hale-Cusanelli obstructed justice during the trial, when he made certain statements under oath, and applied an enhancement to the sentence. Following his prison term, Hale-Cusanelli will be placed on three years of supervised release. He also must pay $2,000 in restitution.

      The case was prosecuted by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia. Valuable assistance was provided by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of New Jersey.

      The case was investigated by the Northeast Field Office of the U.S. Naval Criminal Investigative Service and the FBI’s Newark and Washington Field Offices. Valuable assistance was provided by the Metropolitan Police Department and the U.S. Capitol Police.

       In the 20 months since Jan. 6, 2021, more than 870 individuals have been arrested in nearly all 50 states for crimes related to the breach of the U.S. Capitol, including over 265 individuals charged with assaulting or impeding law enforcement. The investigation remains ongoing.

Four years prison, plus three years supervised release, which could convert to more prison if release conditions are violated.

I'm kind of ambivalent on the prison term. It seems like a lot given none of the charges were for violence. I also can't find exactly what constituted his obstruction of justice enhancement, everything I can find just said it was for statements made under oath. I don't know how much of the sentence can be attributed to the obstruction of justice.

However, I also think rioting, occupying, etc. are corrosive to government. We can't let mobs effectively veto things that they disagree with. That will lead to mob vetoes on every controversial issue. Punishment needs to be high enough to effectively deter that behavior.

But I still see that we're not evenly applying this principle. Left-wing mobs invade Congress and hound legislators and the worst that seems to happen is they get removed. Months on end of assaults on the federal courthouse in Portland weren't taken this seriously.

I suspect a primary reason why Hale got punished so hard is that he was completely unsympathetic. If this was primarily politically driven, then I'd assume we'd see similar blood-thirsty retribution imposed upon the folks who were charged with just misdemeanor trespassing, but almost all of those just got probation and no jail. Hale embarrassed the establishment because he managed to get a security clearance and work at a naval weapons base while being a genuine and almost comical Nazi, so he had to be made an example of. I'm not saying this to claim the justice system had a good reason, but just describing the unfortunate reality of a heavy-handed system operated by heavy-handed humans. Here's the docket entry for his case if you're interested, and here's the sentencing memorandum filed by the government where they asked for 78 months.

Hale talked at length about wishing there was a civil war after J6 so that he could have a chance to arrest "the Jews" if they didn't immediately leave the country. Hale also testified in his own trial and tried to credulously claim he had no idea Congress was even in the Capitol that day. He was caught on video interfering with a police officer trying to arrest a rioter, but at trial he claimed he had no idea that was a cop. Both those factors and more slammed him head-first into the brickwall that is the United States Sentencing Guidelines and the government tried to argue various enhancements to put his offense score was 27, which put him within 70-87 months of prison. His aunt appears to have used Hale's notoriety and received at least $1M of donations under the name "Patriot Freedom Project" but seems to be hoarding the money since records are incomplete. Pg 42 of the brief also helpfully compares their requested sentence with what other J6 defendants got.

So he lied on the stand (badly), had grander motivations about violent revolution beyond just entering the building, and put a cop at risk by physically interfering in an arrest. I personally find his sentence to be egregiously high, but unfortunately it's well within the norm in a country known for eye-wateringly high prison sentences. If I was a criminal justice reform advocate that wanted to highlight an example from the J6 pool, Hale would be one of the last people I'd pick.

But I still see that we're not evenly applying this principle. Left-wing mobs invade Congress and hound legislators and the worst that seems to happen is they get removed. Months on end of assaults on the federal courthouse in Portland weren't taken this seriously.

What would be the falsification to this belief?

What would be the falsification to this belief?

The protestors who who attempted to disrupt the Kavanaugh hearings being arrested en masse and and spending months if not years in prison. A few Anti-fa types trying to break down the door of the Portland courthouse getting the Ashli Babbitt treatment. Someone, anyone involved in the whole CHAZ/CHOP debacle getting arrested and charged with insurrection

Thing is that, as others have pointed out, the double standard is plain to see. Furthermore the visibility of that double standard is precisely why appeals to due process, legal norms, respect for authority, etc... are being met with derision. You can't appeal to trust where there is none, you can't appeal to shared values that are not shared.

The protestors who who attempted to disrupt the Kavanaugh hearings being arrested en masse and and spending months if not years in prison.

Well the 2018 protestors were accused of trespassing/crowding and were arrested en masse. But I don't get the second part, are you claiming that people accused of trespassing/crowding on January 6th were sentenced to months/years in prison?

are you claiming that people accused of trespassing/crowding on January 6th were sentenced to months/years in prison?

I'm not saying that they've been sentenced to anything, I'm saying that they have spent months in prison

You asked @anti-dan what norm was being broken and this is your answer. The norm is that political protests get a light touch, that you don't hold someone in pre-trial confinement for 6 - 9 months when their only charge is parading without a permit. That is the norm that is being broken here.

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