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 -
I'm sorry, when did we start talking about civil rights, and stop talking about civil rights era executive orders? The only one your own article even talks about is Affirmative Action, which, from what I understand, was seen as an aberration by people who put it there, and was ultimately only justified by it's supposedly temporary nature. Yes, Affirmative Action absolutely is woke, and I have no idea how you pretend to be surprised by it.
How can this possibly be relevant? "Woke" is a label for a concept, and Affirmative Action is well within the bounds of that concept.
Right, so the argument by implication, that there's something ridiculous about "woke" being about everything from beer to green energy, and that it's indicative of the word having no meaning, is thus refuted.
Correct, and no one said otherwise. In fact, one of the core criticism of the movement is that the voice and power they are given is completely disproportional to their popularity, which is marginal.
Their voices, measured by the changes they are able to push through corporations and government, is already massive. The right is merely pointing out that those changes are happening, and a part of a particular movement program. They're not magnifying anything, they're shining light on it, which said movement hates as it prefers to operate in darkness (as seen by regular shedding of labels it came up with to describe itself).
For my part, I'm rather frustrated by the dialogue. I feel like my points are being ignored, and occasionally twisted into something I never said. As to your conclusion, it's strange that this is the one you chose to go with, when your own framing of the examples above contradict it. Even if Cultural Marxism wasn't "really" Marxism, the term was invented by people calling themselves Cultural Marxists. If self-description was keeping the meaning coherent, than the shoe not fitting could not have happened (although, in my opinion, it does absolutely fit, the similarities are glaring, and people ignoring them are being pedantic). Likewise, just because you weren't there, or don't recall, anyone on the left disagreeing with being called a Social Justice Warrior, doesn't mean it didn't happen. The 2015-2017 era Internet fora were full of the exact same conversations that you just started, except the term "woke" was substituted for "Social Justice Warrior".
More options
Context Copy link