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 -
The things Trump says are sufficiently horrible that SOP for his supporters ever since 2016 has been saying "Take him seriously, not literally" and calling out people who take him literally as TDS sufferers. And now he is in power his opponents who are not doomposters have been using the same approach as cope. The only people for whom "Trump is just as bad as he says he is" is a comfortable thing to believe is the minority of his supporters who are straightforwardly malignant, and professional Blue Tribe doomposters.
Trump said he would blow up the global economy with tariffs. His opponents said he would blow up the global economy with tariffs. His non-retarded supporters said "Lol TDS - of course he won't actually do that." He is now blowing up the global economy with tariffs, and his non-retarded supporters are split between the ones still claiming that he doesn't mean it and this is a madman strategy negotiating move (and repeating his lies about the tariffs other countries impose on the US in order to do so) and the ones trying to reverse ferret into "Actually blowing up the global economy is good."
The model "Trump is as bad as he claims to be, but the damage was limited in the first term because of GOPe moles in the administration" has an increasingly good track record of making correct predictions. But most people don't want to make correct predictions, they want to appeal to readers. And right now everyone who can read wants to believe that Trump is not as bad as he appears to be - so there is a lot of demand for theories where Trump does not mean what he says.
The fact that after decades of this being the most important issue for the Western proletariat, left wingers still have no ability to wrap their heads around the fact that yes, they do want to blow up the GLOBAL economy, and have wanted to so do ever since it threw their jobs away to China, is immensely frustrating.
Trump's first win was all on preventing NAFTA and building the Wall. And a decade was spent coping that it was about white rage, actually.
How many times do the proles have to vote for economic nationalism before you understand that they're not going to let themselves be replaced by foreign labor and would rather destroy everything because at least then their enemies also suffer?
As I said, a substantial minority of Trump supporters are straightforwardly malignant. "I don't care any more, I just want to watch the world burn so other people suffer as much as I did" is a perfectly comprehensible response to imagined (or even real) oppression, although not a creditable one, or a platform anyone could win an election on if they were clear about what they were doing.
I do not think "the Western proletariat" is a unitary actor, or that they support right-populist parties by supermajority. To the extent that the views of working-class Trump supporters are visible, they voted for Trump in 2024 to get cheaper eggs, not $20/hr non-union assembly line jobs.
In any case, tariffs are a tool and not a policy. The signals about what policy Trump is trying to achieve with tariffs are, to be polite, confused, but looking at the administration's policies in the round, I do not see any evidence at all for "bring back the type of union manufacturing jobs the 1950's economy was built on". I do not see much evidence for "bring back manufacturing" - we know what a manufacturing-focussed industrial policy looks like and how it uses tariffs because most countries have been pursuing one most of the time from the Age of Exploration through to the Bretton Woods Era. Critically, the tariffs vary by product type (with the highest tariffs on manufactured consumer goods) much more than by country of origin.
Then you're simply haven't paid attention to any significant political event in the West for the last two decades and I don't know what to tell you. Who do you think is voting for all those far right parties in Europe? Why do you think Brexit happened?
If your answer to those is thought terminating clichés about either racism, some nebulous social media influence or people being too dumb to figure out what's in their interest, you're actively choosing not to understand what's going on.
See this is exactly what I'm talking about. You are in a bubble so your only experience of those people's discourse is the memes you and they exchange against each other about eggs and the price of gas. But you see, proles don't actually make political decisions solely on the back "I did that" Biden stickers.
What they see is that they live in a country that largely sees them as superfluous non competitive relics and look for any politician that isn't an active enemy of theirs.
Donald Trump may be totally unable to implement his economic views correctly, but he's a friend, not an enemy. And that class of people can count their elite friends on one hand, so naturally they'll fall in behind him.
You're welcome to call that spite if you want, but the fact is you can't buy friendship with slightly cheaper eggs.
People that don't like immigration.
Immigration.
Insofar as we're doing a class analysis, that's about exactly what I'm saying.
Not saying the cultural aspects don't matter at least as much, but we're talking about economic policy here, after all.
I'm not sure this really maps to right-wing growth in Europe. Le Pen's economics are close to Trump in her economic nationalism, but Farage is an old school libertarian who wanted to make the Brexit campaign all about opening up free trade outside of the EU. Meloni has retreated pretty quickly into bog standard neoliberalism. Can't comment on Wilders or the AfD, but there's nothing to suggest that wider right wing movements are an economic protest
I think that Farage's libertarianism is bogging down Reform, if anything. The Right has a problem where, because it's social death to be further right than David Cameron, it's drawing from a very small pool of potential politicians. In a lot of countries, you get maybe one serious, charismatic far-right politician and you just have to live with their quirks.
This is incidentally why the left tries so hard to get rid of them via lawfare. Not only does it narrow the pipeline, but if you can nobble this decade's Great Man then you've got a good long time before another one comes along. Look at how (on the other side) socialism just collapsed after Corbyn got pushed out. Albeit in that case he lost an election pretty badly.
I'd say it's not so much his libertarianism as the fact he is solely a libertarian, he's not really right-wing culturally at all. His aims have always aligned with right-wing voters so he's always courted them but it's pretty clear he doesn't care much about things like immigration
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link