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 -
Trump renaming stuff is good, actually.
My initial reaction to Trump renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America and reverting Denali to Mount McKinley was "this is dumb and childish".
I've changed my mind.
If you're a white man under 50, then you've experienced things being renamed as something that is done to your people, for the benefit of others.
Statues of Jefferson and Washington are taken down and statues of civil rights leaders go up. Columbus Day is referred to as "Indigenous People's Day". Robert E. Lee, once the namesake of so many things, is gradually being erased from the map. Since the 1960's, nearly every sizeable town has acquired an MLK Boulevard (usually ridden with crime). And King County, Washington recently did a "name change" in which it discarded its former namesake, former Vice President William R. King, to honor (who else) Martin Luther King.
Countries in the third world have employed this power play as well. Bombay becomes Mumbai, Madras becomes Chennai. Cape Verde becomes Cabo Verde, the Ivory Coast becomes Cote d'Ivoire, and Turkey becomes Türkiye. How long until China insists that foreigners uses its rightful name: 中国.
The indigenous names are worse. Barrow, Alaska is now Utqiagvik. Port Elizabeth, South Africa, has become Gqeberha. Apparently, the citizens of these places don't even use the new and unpronouncable names – which seem to exist only as a way to flex on white people.
Since the 1960s, name changes are one of those things that the left just took complete control over while no one was paying attention. But why should should the left get the exclusive right to rename things?
Trump is now upsetting this forgone conclusion. You rename stuff, we'll rename stuff too. And if you want control over names, you're going to have to give up something else in return. I think it's a good move.
I understand the sentiment, and I even sympathize with it, but I feel the need to take the opposite position.
People renaming stuff for ideological reasons is bad actually.
First, it's confusing and a waste of time, since everyone has to contextualize and relearn common concepts that did not meaningfully change, update maps, and generally give thought to something that wasn't an issue before. It's a problem that arises out of nothing.
Second, it doesn't convey any new information other than who is in charge, so it's a waste of time when that can be demonstrated through other means. Worse, like all symbolic wins it actually is a disincentive to doing practical good. All the ressources spent on words are ressources not spent on making whatever you care about great again. If the vanities of language are what you care about, fine and dandy, but that's unlikely to top the list.
Third, it erases our tether to the past, the names of things can often come from ancient sources that remind us of useful and interesting history, the more ancient the name, the more culture one is vandalizing by venerating their new gods.
Fourth, it's ultimately futile and amounts to suggestion, as do all attempts at linguistic prescriptivism. The ultimate judges of the quality of a new rule are the speakers, and they organically decide to adopt it. Changes imposed by fiat can sometimes be adopted, but all the rejected ones only end up as political shibboleth. Unless there is a groundswell of support to rename the Gulf, it'll end up as yet another tell like "inclusive" terminology and "democrat" vs "democratic" as relating to the party. A further marker of division instead of unity.
So ultimately, I don't even think it's a bad kind of suggestion, but it doesn't belong in policy, and the power to name things rests either in creators, discoverers, achievers, or coiners of beautiful language.
As much as I think of Trump's linguistic acumen, the man did change American English with his speech in a way people don't always realize, I don't see this particular attempt at gaudy jingoism as anything more than that. He's free to make me wrong by being so successful people call it as he wishes in his honor.
Instead of pointing at landmarks, why not create all those new cities he talked about, those would be worthy of the honor.
You are correct about the first three, and wrong about the fourth (renaming obviously works, failed attempts are exceptions, not the rule). But so what? My enemies keep doing it. How do you propose to get them to stop it? Tit for tat is the only strategy I can think of that has any chance of success. Got any better ideas? Unless you do, I support renaming, and I think Trump should keep doing it.
How does Trump renaming things disincentivize your enemies from doing so when they get power? I don't see it. If anything, you're making the job (of plundering the budget) easier for them as now there are more things to rename back.
For a person who values the status quo historical names, political renaming looks like the two sides pulling things into the orthogonal directions, not opposite ones. Just because I wouldn't want Putin renaming Moscow to Vladgrad doesn't mean I should accept "New Kyiv" instead (or vice versa).
A better move would be to find something they care about that hasn't been renamed recently, and rename that. That's more tit for tat than reversal is, but requires that they actually care about something.
Though imagining a sign splitting the difference by saying "Denali (D)/McKinley (R) National Park" is a bit funny.
As always Northern Ireland has beaten you to the culture war punch. It's Londonderry if you are Protestant/Unionist and Derry if you are Catholic/Nationalist so the both sides version is Derry/Londonderry (read "Derry stroke Londonderry") or Stroke City to make fun of the issue.
"A visible sign of the dispute to the visitor is in the road signs;[108] those pointing to the city from the Republic refer to it as Derry (and in Irish, Doire), whilst signs in Northern Ireland use Londonderry. It is not uncommon to see vandalised road signs—the "London" part of the name spray painted over on "Londonderry" road signs by nationalists,[108] or occasionally "London" added to "Derry" signs by unionists.[108]"
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