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 -
This started as a reply to @SecureSignals @RandomRanger and others but I didn't want to leave it buried at the bottom of a 20 comment long chain as I feel like it warrants examination on it's own.
I posit that the biggest obstacle to the online dissident/woke/identitarian right gaining influence and a wider audience in the US is not that it is rife with grifters, feds, and cosplayers. (Though it is) It's biggest obstacle is that it doesn't do enough to differentiate itself from the online woke/identitarian left in the eyes of people who are not members of the priestly caste (IE Journalists, Academics, etc...). While I acknowledge that the identitarian right has managed to make inroads within the priestly caste (See Yarvin's recent interview in the NYT), it seems to me that the influence of priestly caste has been waning overall (See the election of Donald Trump).
I get the impression that a lot of commentors here don't grasp just how unpopular identity politics is in "normie" spaces. In fact, I would say that to call it "unpopular" may be grossly under selling it. Leftists often lament the weakness/lack of class consciousness in the US, that the poor, more often than not, do not see themselves as "exploited" as much as they see themselves as "temporarily embarrassed". However I believe that this is a feature rather than a bug if one wants to live in a society with high trust and social mobility, and one of the things that distinguishes the US from other nations.
If the identitarian right and the wider priestly caste are going to hold on to Identity Politics as an organizing principal/value they are going to have to have to confront the fact that the perception of Identity Politics in the popular zeitgeist is that of an ideology for losers. An ideology for people too stupid, degenerate, or incompetent to survive in an honest meritocracy. An ideology for people who could not and therefore "Didn't Earn It". They will also have to overcome the perceived association of Identity Politics with Socialism, Marx, and other foreign (distinctly Un-American) influences. Specifically, those of the Indian sub-continent (IE the worst place on earth) and Europe (IE that socialist shithole our ancestors fled across the ocean to escape, and that we as Americans have expended untold millions in blood and treasure trying to protect from its own worst impulses).
Finally, there is the question of value added. Is the priestly caste even relevant these days? Are the jobs that the priestly caste performs mostly fake? Could we do away with them entirely? If so, is trying to align with them a smart move?
Imagine a sincere white supremacist, a walking talking Hollywood cliche with a shaved head, half a dozen kids, a wife he beats, and the 14 words tattooed on his back. How would you go about convincing him that he would be doing more to secure a future for his children (and his genes) by urging his son to associate with gay Catholics and non-binary/MTF cat-girls, than he would by letting his son date that thicc Latina from down the street?
I contend that these are the sort of issues that both the woke left and the identitarian right are going to have to grapple with if they don't want "Trumpism" to run the table on them, as much of the ground level opposition to wokism as it exists today is in reality opposition to identify politics as a whole.
That is certainly not the perception of Jewish Identity Politics, take Ben Shapiro for example. I doubt you feel that way about Jewish Identity Politics and the way it expresses itself in politics and culture. And even if you do feel that way about it, you are very far away from the Normie who perceives it as totally normal in the base case, but in many cases they view defense of Jewish Identity Politics as a moral impetus that falls even on non-Jews.
I do not believe the engagement of Jews with Identity Politics in how they socially, politically, and economically organize is because they are losers who are too stupid or degenerate or incompetent to survive in an honest meritocracy. Do you think that?
How is it we arrived at this point, where Jewish Identity Politics is a profound moral impetus, but White Identity Politics is just for people "too stupid, degenerate, or incompetent to survive in an honest meritocracy?"
I would say, however we arrived at this point, we use the same tools and levers to reverse this perception among normies. Normies, and people like yourself, have arrived at this bifurcated interpretation of Identity Politics based on the esoteric racial propaganda you have been exposed to since you were a child in various forms of your daily life. My opinion is not that we do normie outreach with political arguments, it's that we use the same tools to promote White identity as have been used to create your negative perception of White identity.
And maybe you think you arrived at your opinion of White Identity based only on rational argument and careful consideration. No you didn't- it's downstream of history you were taught, the stories you were told by your teacher, the material you were told to read in school, the movies you watch every time you go to the theater, the social causes taken up by Hollywood celebrities. If all of those things had conveyed a different cultural signal to you, you would also have a different opinion of White Identity, so it is for normies.
Yes, this is a Spencerian interpretation for how esoteric, racial moralization and demoralization signals in religion and culture are the key for directing the identities and behavior of the normies. Not going up to them and trying to convince them with arguments. That's certainly not how you or the normies became convinced that Identity Politics for Jews is great and Identity Politics for White people is degenerate.
Again, 'jews' are a monophyletic group, so identity politics for them makes sense. 'White people' are not, they're multiple groups, several of which hate each other, so identity politics don't make sense.
That is the funniest thing you have ever said, European peoples are incredibly more monophyletic than Jews, who themselves are 50% European among Ashkenazis. Even the notion they are descended from the Hebrews is dubious, compared to the more likely possibility of converts in the Roman Empire.
People don't even understand how static European race has been racially for thousands of years. A Spaniard from the south of Spain is more closely related genetically to a Norwegian than to a Moroccan.
Edit: I would also suggest that the intra-European racial animosity among Whites in the US- while I acknowledge that does express itself in different ways even today, it's still lower than it is between Jewish subgroups in Israel. And in any case the perception of Jewish Identity Politics among normies is not at all a function of the supposed monophyletic-ness of Jews, it's a function of the propaganda that has been transmitted to them their entire lives.
How do you square this claim with millenia of intra-european warfare? Are you saying that you can't tell a Prussian from a Paddy? or a Paddy from a Wop?
Monophyly means belongs to a Clade descended from a common ancestral group not shared by other people- there is very much a European Clade that stands out among the rest of humanity, and Jews themselves are descended from the mixture of that Clade with a Near-Eastern mixture.
I don't even think it's a relevant question for your argument or my response to you. But all Europeans descend from the mixture of three constituent races: Anatolian Farmers (represented best by modern Sardinians who are nearly 100% of this admixture), Western Hunter-Gatherers, and Proto-Indo-European Steppe herders (most concentrated in Northern Europe). All Europeans are a combination of this ancestral group, and nobody else in the world is descended from that ancestral group alone. That is a clade that is unique to Europeans and only Europeans among everyone else in the world, from the Spanish to the Swede.
You are talking out your ass, per your own sources the vast majority of Jews are descended from a single Levantine source while the various sub-tribes of Europe seem to come from all over with distinct physiognomic differences betwern Iberians, Celts, Anglos, Scandis, Slavs, Greeks, Et Al.
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
More options
Context Copy link