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 -
Keystone Clown Contest Part 2: Ischemic Boogaloo
See here for the last discussion of the Hoodie Ogre vs the Huckster Healer.
In Our Last Exciting Episode...
Mehmet Oz, in an effort to look like a real person, went to a grocery store and was caught on camera complaining about the price of crudités, which is apparently New Jerseyan (or maybe Ottoman) for "uncooked vegetable platter, maybe with dip". So Fetterman did the obvious thing and ran ads and had a fundraiser about how obviously elitest and out of touch it is to use (forgive me) Fr*nch words for common things.
Oz's people clapped back with this banger
(Speaking as a man who once spent three weeks on the "all cheesesteak diet" and learned a painful lesson thereby, eat your vegetables.)
Again, Fetterman's people did the obvious thing and harshly criticized Oz for this failure of decorum. Many variations on "Imagine your doctor making fun of you."
So, the next point of contention to come up is the debates. Team Fetterman initially tried to use the mockery about his stroke as a reason to dodge out on them altogether,, to which Team Oz published this vicious list of concessions
(Incidentally, "lying liberal Fetterman" is a terrible mocking nickname. I never thought I'd long for the days of Shady Katie McGinty. I wish I could find one of the ads that really hammed up the nickname, but they don't seem to be on Youtube.)
Team Fetterman is obviously outraged.
Ok, more serious face on.
As of now, the first debate was supposed to have been on Sept 6th, and didn't happen. Fetterman has committed to one debate, but not until mid-late October, which will be weeks after early voting starts. Team Fetterman has been flipping stories about his health issues, from downplaying it, to "almost died", and now it's purportedly some minor auditory processing issues. Some people covering him have expressed concerns, including the Pittsburg Post-Gazette. Fetterman has only had some brief interactions with the public or reporters since his stroke in May, heavily supervised. The ads he's been bombarding the Philly market with are supposedly made with pre-stroke recordings. His current speaking is.... not great. This issue, and Oz campaign ads hammering Fetterman on his progressive crime policies may be working to Oz's favor, as Fetterman's lead seems to be more like 4-5%, down from 11% a month ago.
But at least he's got the Snookie vote.
he's clearly not healthy enough for the job, but if he was to win and drop dead it would not be that big of a deal anyway. this is not the POTUS
If nothing prevented Strom Thurmond from being elected to the US Senate at the age of 93, there's nothing particular (apart from the will of the voters, of course) preventing Fetterman on any health concerns, either.
I don't think anyone is saying otherwise. The lack of a legal barrier to Fetterman running doesn't mean it's not a legitimate voting consideration though. Unless you are making a stronger argument that it is wrong to even bring up a person's age or health in a political race.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link