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 -
https://archive.ph/usLjz
For those of you who haven't caught the news, a lone individual set fire to the Pennsylvania governor's mansion over the weekend. After turning himself in, he has been charged with a number of crimes that are noted in the article.
The perpetrator is obviously not mentally well. His own mother repeatedly called the police on him warning officials that he was dangerous and unbalanced. Some reports indicate that he was on bail for assault charges at the time the arson occurred.
I make this post because a lot of hay has been made over the last decade about "stochastic terrorism", and while this doesn't fit the bill exactly, it does have me thinking about it.
Put bluntly, we all know that dangerously crazy people exist out in the world, and a significant number of them have phones, computers, and televisions. If that is something we know, what responsibility do we have, as individuals, and as a culture to self police our speech to avoid giving these peope what they believe is a call to arms? Is it constant for all people, or does it vary based upon some criteria?
It's not crazy to be upset about what atrocities US enables in Gaza and Middle East more generally (the guy who did the arson may indeed be crazy for all I know). You can't prevent people talking about bad things politicians are doing for politicians' safety, that's absurd.
It’s pretty crazy to firebomb Shapiro’s house over it, since he has pretty much 0 impact on US foreign policy. But he is a Jew, so…
He was expected to be Kamala's VP running mate, so he's probably more influential than thousands of kids Israel blew up, for example.
But...he wasn't Kamala's VP running mate? And it wouldn't have mattered even if he was. How does Shapiro have any impact whatsoever on the war in Gaza?
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