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 -
Empires, nations, countries, and large entities "kowtow to their enemies" in specific ways all the time, strategically, for success. Whether as a trick or just to reduce likelihood of death. Every historical figure we see as masculine or honorable or powerful did things to appease others constantly. They also took action to slaughter their enemies, hear the lamentations of their women, etc - and often more latter than former (or often the reverse) - but refusing to make any concessions, even if they help you win overall, is very stupid and means you lose.
Kiwifarms' actions are already constrained in a million ways by conventional morality, the state, and what hosting platforms are allowed to do. So are yours, so are mine, so are everyone's, it will always be "how constrained, and in what way", not "unconstrained". For instance, Josh can't even enter a gentlemen's duel with Prince - extremely dishonorable! Nor can they - legally - break into keffals' internet accounts and get stuff (despite some members either doing so or reporting so on the forum). And they would do the latter a lot more if they could. They already censor dox, putting it behind a login-to-view box - already kowtowing! And they already submit to their enemies in practice by being subject to the "Cathedral" - as josh named in the post - 's legal system, economic system, and society. Staking a post in some minor, specific subconflict that happens to be particularly obvious at the moment is just a strategic error.
These are not warring states and militaries. Kiwifarms has no ability to threaten or harm Cloudflare, and so 'buying time' is pointless. Cloudflare will always stomp on them so long as they use Cloudflare's services. The only right move is to refuse to heel and find someone else.
kiwifarms.net says: Due to an imminent and emergency threat to human life, the content of this site is blocked from being accessed through Cloudflare’s infrastructure. For more details, please see: https://blog.cloudflare.com/kiwifarms-blocked/
Likely, the causes were both internal and external pressure and specific, recent posts on kiwifarms or elsewhere that cloudflare interpreted to be an "imminent and emergency threat to human life". Kiwifarms should have attempted to reduce outward signs of the latter to keep their site up. It might - or even probably wouldn't - have worked, but is worth doing anyway.
Some users might argue otherwise - "we're spreading the truth, how disgusting the libs are, they can't let people see it because the regime would collapse". Most kiwis aren't there, it really is just a site for laughing at freaks, but there were a few posts to that effect that got a bunch of positive reactions. Ofc this is ... not entirely wrong, but wrong in every important way there's probably some impact of kiwifarms existing, but not in any simple way like that.
Yeah, if they had somewhere else to go. Josh isn't optimistic, as the recent t.me post shows. "refusing to heel", and having CF take away your site, is still losing. It's much, much worse for both 'laughing at lolcows' and 'spreading how disgusting trans grooming is' than wordfiltering the word 'bomb'.
Kiwifarms has taken hundreds of actions exactly like 'censoring a bit more to survive' over the past decade. Claiming this one is dishonorable ... it's a website for laughing at lolcows. If a bull running at you, you should move out of the way, whether you can shoot it later or not.
"Finding a gun to shoot the bull with" and "not moving out of the way" aren't the same action, at all. The latter doesn't help you win. Just because some meekly let the bull rampage - the answer isn't "letting it hit you in the chest".
There is no gun that can shoot Cloudflare. There is no action that can be taken against Cloudflare now or in the future. Cloudflare wants them gone, and is committed to their existential termination. Bowing down to them is simply pathetic behavior that will not change the outcome. Groveling is always the wrong move, even if they can find no other refuge.
Cloudflare is not a charging bull. It's not a mindless animal. It's a collection of thinking, reasoned sadists, who want Kiwifarms gone but more than that want Kiwifarms humiliated and broken. Being removed is inevitable; giving Cloudflare more satisfaction is wholly unnecessary.
I think what the other poster is trying to say is that instrumentally it's much more effective to pretend deference for a while, then do exactly what you are suggesting - migrate to another venue and hopefully keep 'fighting the fight', whatever that means to them.
This type of aggressive and short-sighted thinking is a large reason why censorship has successfully killed off so many communities, in my mind. We are incredibly lucky that the mods had the forethought to migrate the community before we were killed off as well.
To put it another way, do you think Cloudflare would be 'more satisfied' with a successful migration of the community, or with the current situation?
This type of aggressive and short-sighted thinking is not, actually, why censorship has worked, because communities constantly appease and slowly wither rather than do what I say.
If there was a way to prevent the slow withering of these communities, and turn it around to force the state to change, would that be more appealing to you than violence?
ETA: Not that I know of a mystical solution, but I think it is worth finding. Right now I'd tentatively agree that violence is at least a surefire way of getting what you want, if you have the skills to use it well.
Ultimately, though I do sincerely advocate in favor of political violence, it would perhaps be more accurate to say I advocate most for direct and immediate action; I think intelligent people, in this community and others, far too often fall into a mental trap where instead of decisively resolving a situation for better or worse they drag it out because they're afraid. They put too much thought into consequences, too much thought into risk, and inevitably conclude that this fight isn't worth fighting.
And they conclude the next one isn't, either.
And the one after that.
Every time, there are many good, valid, sensible arguments for submission, and a scarcity of sensible arguments for defiance. Yet if you cede all ground because you're afraid of risk, eventually there is no more ground to cede. 'Death before surrender' is not merely a pithy phrase; a group that internalizes that message and acts in accordance with it will make hostile powers think twice and be more cautious, because even if they can win it will happen at a cost.
If you fight, you might lose. This is true. I can't deny it: if the American Right embraced my violent outlook, it is possible I, and people who share my values, would be crushed to paste and die miserably, or be imprisoned, or tortured, or paraded as a vanquished foe as a status symbol for the progressive elite. It's also possible we'd win. It's also possible we'd lose, but exact enough of a blood price from the left that they back off and treat the survivors with more respect and permit more autonomy.
The only guaranteed outcome is that if we always surrender, we definitely lose. You have to be a fighter.
It is very stupid to advocate it somewhere other than your gathering of blood-sworn battle brothers. Whatever allies you hoped to stir to action are mixed with opponents who see you abandon the idea of moral high ground and resign to abandoning theirs.
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