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 crux of the Abrego Garcia controversy is a dispute about who "morally" counts as an American citizen.
The rallying cry of the pro-Abrego Garcia camp is: "If they can do it to him, they can do it to any of us." In other words, they see no meaningful difference between him and a legal US citizen, and so there is no Schelling Fence that can be drawn between the two. On other hand, the pro-Trump camp who wants Abrego Garcia to stay in El Salvador are not at all concerned that they will be next, because in their view citizens and non-citizens are two morally distinct categories.
The slippery slope argument (e.g. Laurence Tribe yesterday, and Justice Sotomayor's concurrence) is that if the government gets its way with Abrego Garcia, there will be no legal obstacle preventing them from treating citizens in the same way.
But the thing is, this is already the case. The US government's treatment of citizens abroad is already effectively unconstrained by the law. The government can negotiate for the release of a citizen imprisoned by another country, but nobody would argue that the government is legally obligated to do this, and it's absurd to imagine a court compelling them to do so, because that effectively makes diplomacy impossible. (The US government must be able to value the citizen's return at less than infinity, or else they lose all negotiating leverage.) On the other hand, the government can drone-strike a citizen abroad without due process, and while that may stir up political pushback here at home, there are effectively no legal repercussions.
This is because, according to the constitutional separation of powers, foreign affairs are a quintessentially "non-justiciable political question". In common parlance this means: If you don't like what the government is doing, the proper way to fix it is through advocacy and the democratic process, not through the court system.
To which the pro-Abrego Garcia camp will gesture around at the crowd of protesters they've assembled, waving "Free Abrego Garcia!" signs, and say "Great, come join us. Here's your sign!"
But of course the pro-Trump immigration hawks see no need to take it up, because even if these protests have no effect, this does not in any way diminish their confidence that if a citizen were to be treated in the same way, then the backlash would be swift, universal, and sufficient to compel the citizen's return - no court order needed. For them, it is simply obvious that the failure of the Abrego Garcia advocacy has no implications whatsoever for the success of the hypothetical advocacy on behalf of a fellow citizen, and this is no cause for cognitive dissonance because citizens and illegal-immigrant non-citizens are two entirely separate categories.
Prior to anything else in the political life of a nation, there must be near-universal agreement on who constitutes the body politic for whose benefit the government exists and to whom they are accountable. If there is factional dispute over this basic question, then morally speaking there is no nation, but multiple distinct nations that happen to find themselves all mixed up in the same land. But I'm sure this is no great surprise.
It's all play acting. Most of the American's that are "frightened" about this deportation don't actually think they are at risk for being deported. Where would they even deport actual Americans that didn't come here as looters? Most of em are from parts of Europe. You're gonna threaten someone by deporting them to the UK? Germany,? Scandinavia? Most of the left supposedly want that.
What they think is at risk, and correctly as this is what the actual fight is over, is the shadow government. By circumventing all the procedural nonsense and bureaucracy that the establishment has built to defend it's own interests Trump eats away at their power. The arguments they are posting here are the same sort of fake outrage and concern they were pushing about Elon gutting USAID or how social security was going to collapse and stop working if you audit it, or really anything touching any of the many other appendages of the shadow government.
Against my better judgement, I've decided to stop lurking and make this account specifically to tell you (at the admitted risk of being uncivil) that you are VERY fucking wrong on this- and that you should consider 'updating your priors', as the local lingo goes, in order to better reflect your hated outgroup's theory-of-mind accordingly.
I'll grant you this much; In the nightmare scenario that Trump does start deporting US citizens to El Salvadoran gulags, I'd probably be pretty far down the list of people to target; after all, I'm not a felon (at least, as far as I know), I'm white, I'm male, and otherwise generally inoffensive to MAGA sensibilities aside from my leftism...
...But a lot of my friends would be a lot higher-up on that list than me, as would most of my family (by virtue of being even more actively outspoken than I am), and if they do get targeted, I'm liable to quickly get a lot more radical- and thus a lot higher on the list as well.
El Salvador, of course. As Trump just clarified earlier today.
That particular bit of outrage and concern wasn't fake either. You should perhaps consider updating your theory of mind on that as well.
Consider the possibility when someone tells you they're against something, maybe they are, in fact, against it on the object-level, as well any other deeper levels you care to psychoanalyze.
And to respond to your and @The_Nybbler 's responses to @Amadan- ...It's not "play acting" or "method acting"** either. I assure you, I genuinely do worry about this.
I'm sure you genuinely believe that you think you can tell I'm lying by my "crocodile tears" & 'revealed preferences' over COVID measures, the January 6th protestors, and other perceived injustices from "our team"... But consider the possibility that the bespoke realities of others differ from yours, and the screen that you (and most of the other posters on TheMotte, seemingly) is showing a very different picture than the screen that I (and most other liberals & leftists in this country) are watching.
**To the latter poster- I'd respond that the most common way to 'Live the role of someone who believes Trump will deport US citizens for being political enemies' is to actually be someone who believes Trump will deport US citizens for being political enemies- which I believe he likely will unless he starts getting real pushback on this kind of shit real quick.
Back during Trump 45, pictures of kids in cages were posted to Twitter and Facebook to show the horrors of the Trump administration. People were horrified. Truly horrified. But it was a very strange sort of horrification, because when it was revealed that the pictures were in fact taken during the Obama administration, they did not become horrified at Obama. I am not claiming that the people scared now are like AOC, turning on the waterworks at an empty parking lot for political gain. I am claiming they are like those people horrified at the pictures of kids in cages during Trump 45. They want to be the sort of person who most effectively is scared and horrified by Trump. Thus, they self-modify to actually feel those feelings. That's similar to method acting.
I am not "they". I certainly was rather disquieted to learn that those dated back to Obama's administration- though given his deportation record, I guess I shouldn't have been surprised. Much like with his record on transparency, Gitmo, drone strikes (and various other expansions of the Bush-era "security" apparatuses), and others, I've soured on Obama in the years since he left office- and looking back, the borderline cult-of-personality surrounding him was probably a bad thing; it's for the best that he's now out of office and he keeps a relatively low profile nowadays.
I will say that at least the Obama administration had the minimal decency to regard this as a shameful necessity and not attempt to highlight and proudly boast about it. It's a low, low bar, to be clear, but it's one of the many the Trump administration couldn't.
If you run over your neighbor with a car while texting & driving down your cul-de-sac, immediately realize its your own fault, and then feel crushing shame over your carelessness, then I suppose we could call that "method acting" too.
But that would dilute the term "method acting" to the point of meaninglessness- as well as cheapen the rhetorical effect of dismissing anyone who disagrees with you as just being a 'method actor'.
If you want people to "update their priors about their outgroup", you have to change your behavior going forward, not pinky-promise that you totally were "disquieted" way back when, with no trail to show for it.
Sure, 'actions speak louder than words', and all that- but what, exactly, would you propose I do to "change my behavior" going forward? Vote Republican?
(I'm aware that may come off as more than a little glib, but I'm being completely serious. I may be quite disgruntled with the Democrats, but what's the alternative? The Democratic Socialists? The Libertarians? Might as well just throw away my vote, and I'm not going to do that.)
Oh, nothing like that, just say something next time you're rather disquieted.
Well, I try.
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