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 mean, Koreans and Indians are clearly market dominant minorities in poor urban regions, and Cajuns and Afrikaner’s fill similar roles in parts of the rural south.
These areas might be poor by American standards, but they’re globally very very wealthy, so the concept clearly applies regardless of what academic theories about race say.
I agree that Jews aren’t one, by the way, because they’re usually not owning capital.
Korean and Indians in poor urban regions often serve as middleman minorities, but I think that is a different concept.
TBQH, it seems like the distinction is one that only exists to claim that US whites are systemically advantaged over everyone else, no exceptions.
That would be a strange claim to be made by Thomas Sowell, who has written a fair amount about middleman minorities. As for market dominant minorities, as noted in the original link, Chua's concept is about such places as 'the Philippines, [where] Chua notes that the Chinese community comprise one percent of the population but control 60 percent of the private economy, with the result being resentment on the part of the Filipino majority against the Chinese minority creating an ethnic conflict. Similarly, in Indonesia the Chinese Indonesian community make up three percent of the population but control 75 percent of the economy. Similar patterns occur throughout other Southeast Asian economies." Clearly a different concept than middleman minorities, and neither has anything to do with US whites; not everything on the planet is about the current culture war.
Chua’s concept seems too narrow. If you divide into different ethnic groups (not just white but British, German, etc) there is no dominant group in the US in part because the economy is so massive unlike the Philippines.
It is true that Jews disproportionately own a lot of wealth in the US. It is also true that probably inspires jealous.
Too narrow for what? As an excuse to criticize some group one doesn't like, perhaps. But not as a means of understanding the world; it is specifically about a phenomenon which takes place in relatively low-income countries. Broadening it risks rendering it both meaningless and useless
I think you have this backwards. I’m not here to bury the Jews but to praise them.
I also think Jewish success in wealth explains in part why we are so worried about antisemitism. When you have a dominant market minority jealousy often occurs which leads to ugly acts. So we have a norm of trying to police that jealousy.
In my mind, a dominant market minority doesn’t mean that they have to own a majority of the wealth. In my mind, that minority group has to have a very disproportionately large share of the wealth — enough to create jealousy.
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