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 DOGE cuts were purely performative. Anyone trying to cut the federal deficit without tackling the absurd ballooning elder care costs (Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid portions that go to elders) isn't serious. Science is an extremely tiny slice of the federal budget, but it happens to be one where the effects of cuts won't show up for a decent amount of time. This is in contrast to something like tariffs, where Trumpian buffoonishness is almost immediately apparent in a number of ways.
Jewish nuclear researchers that fled Nazi Germany helped produce the atomic bomb. I'm not saying the current crop of researchers are doing stuff that's that serious, but having scientists flee your broken sectarian country is generally a bad thing.
This is such a fucking weird angle, I don't understand why progressives keep deploying it. No, they were explicitly what the people asked for - an end to stupid frivolous spending. Not an end to social security and Medicare. Nobody asked for that. They just wanted to stop the USG from spending American tax dollars to fund ridiculous frivolous bullshit like communist rap albums and teaching lesbian farmers about sustainability.
And considering your position on Trump, the idea of you wanting him to go after Medicare and social security is confusing. It's like you actually don't give a shit about the economy, you just want Trump to do more big things "where Trumpian buffoonishness is almost immediately apparent in a number of ways", because the only thing you care about is being outraged and outrage at trumpian buffoonishness often has a curious way of dying out with the start of a new media cycle.
I feel like you're not really disagreeing with me on the key argument. I'm sure there's thin slices of fat that could be cut across the USFG, but it's not going to be significant enough to meaningfully impact the deficit. So sure, cut the communist rap albums. Just don't pretend it's anything other than a performative victory.
And no, I want both parties to get serious about tackling the deficit. It'll likely require a compromise of both some tax increases and spending cuts, and by virtue of how the budget currently is, some of those cuts will almost certainly have to come from elder care. The best time to stop kicking that can was 30 years ago. The second best time to do so is right now.
If Trump attempted this, he'd probably screw it up in dozens of ways. But that's just Trump being Trump. Bears shit in the woods, and Trump is a buffoon.
Sorry it took me so long to reply, I started writing one last night but I was being lazy and writing it in the website and brave refreshed and I lost it.
You know it's not going to happen though no matter who is in charge though so why would you want him to try it if he's just going to fuck it up? I can tell you my reasoning - I don't know if tariffs would work, they seem crazy to me but so does printing infinite money and that's the only other option I ever see offered! To be fair, this isn't my wheelhouse, maybe in economist circles everyone knows a way to fix it that isn't either tariff negotiations or 'hum loudly enough that you are distracted from the topic', but in the msm I only hear about how crazy and destructive Trump is, and no alternatives except shit like 'do a vat instead' and other solutions that amount to maintain the status quo.
I assumed the doge cuts were meant to be performative, meant to be bread and circuses in preparation for hard times. Because we aren't fixing the economy without hard times. But now he's rolled back the tariffs, which given how Trump operates likely means an internal pillar of support collapsed. And yet even still, the amount of effort his opposition had to deploy to disable him is insane! So I return to the hill I always die on - I think Trump plays up his buffoonery so people underestimate him, but maybe he is just a dummy. Whatever he is, his opposition aren't any better, they are just better at hiding their fuck ups. Either way it looks like we aren't getting the economy fixed without a proper disaster.
Your comment is excessively fatalistic. Countries undo their bad decisions all the time. Massive peacetime deficits were not a normal occurrence in this country for the first couple hundred years of its existence. Whether the US will cut its current deficits is up to the electorate. I'm not particularly hopeful about the prospect given that the current electorate is full of populist idiots that would punish politicians for making the correct long-term decisions vis-a-vis deficit reduction, but it's certainly theoretically achievable. Tariffs are not the way to get there, as the amount of money raised would be comparatively tiny relative to the damage done.
The US isn't printing "infinite money", as that would have resulted in hyperinflation (inflation of high single digits or low double digits doesn't count as hyperinflation).
Lmao yep I agree one hundred percent. Except for the populist modifier, that's just your nail. Unless 95% of the country are populists now. Or are you suggesting that the democrats (who think populists are evil) would cut ss Medicare or welfare were they in power?
You call me excessively fatalistic, but I think you are being naive. Trump is a symptom, not the cause of our leaders' incompetence. (After all if the universities could fix the economy, why didn't they when Biden was in charge?) I am actually not completely blackpilled by that realisation however, because there is a silver lining to learning that our elite human capital are just idiot narcissists - it means you can let go of the idea that there could be a society of people who don't punish politicians for making the correct long-term decisions. Due to the confluence of unintended second order effects, perverse incentives and incompetence, our society is fucking atrocious at producing people who won't punish politicians for making the correct long term decisions, but it's even worse at producing politicians who will make the correct long term decisions.
Leftists have their own version of populism which is mostly focused on billionaire-bashing. The left hasn't been particularly interested in balancing the budget since Clinton, and he was basically forced to do that by a Republican Congress.
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