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 war between Trump and Elon Musk is heating up. They've been continuously escalating the fight on both sides, with Elon claiming that Trump wouldn't have won without him.
On the other side, Trump is arguing that Elon only got upset because the Big Beautiful Bill has plans to cut the EV subsidies in it.
The major dispute, at least on a public level, is over deficit spending. Elon was pretty clear during the campaign that deficit spending was a big issue, and indeed most of the "grey tribe" Silicon Valley types who switched sides to support Trump also are starting to regret their decision it seems. Notably David Friedman(?) from the All-in Podcast, and I'm sure there are others if folks want to fill me in.
Either way, to me this breakup seems to be a clear split between the classic red tribe which Trump seemingly still controls with an iron fist, and the grey tribe that Elon Musk typifies.
To quote the famous Scott Alexander article, I can Tolerate Anything Except the Outgroup:
It seems to me that with the flip to Trump, we're beginning to see the classic Kingmaker dynamic unfold, where Silicon Valley billionaires are playing the third mediator between the two major tribes. I'm very curious to see how this pans out. Personally, I'm very much on the "hey we have to cut spending now" side of things.
Some of the more optimistic folks are claiming that Elon will either support the Libertarian party, or start his own party, based on a poll he made on X asking if a new political party should form.
Either way this is all very entertaining from my perspective, and it actually leaves me a bit more optimistic than I was that something will be done about cutting spending. We will of course see where the chips fall.
On one had, I did not expect this fight to actually happen and I was profoundly disinterested in the media that seemed to be egging it on and trying to make it happen for the last few months. On the other hand, does anyone else get the sense that this is a staged fight? It seems so ridiculous and performative that it maps closer to WWF wrestling or Biggie/Tupac feuds that were purely stage managed events. Jon Stewart suggested as much this morning before all the big fireworks went off this afternoon. I cant help but think that he's got it right here, even though I'm sure people will say this afternoons attacks make that less likely.
No, if it was a staged fight there is no reason for Musk to use what in our society is the rhetoric equivalent of nuclear weapons, which is implying that Trump had sex with underage girls on Epstein's island. It would be easy to effectively stage a fight without going that far.
Also, there's Occam's razor. It seems more likely to me that these two guys, both of whom have a track record of being emotionally volatile, abrasive, and vindictive, actually did just get into a real spat, than that it is staged.
Yep. I don't see why Elon would go straight for the Epstein accusation except as a result of being too volatile.
One problem is that he probably doesn't have any strong enough evidence. And even if people really believed Trump had screwed a 14 year old - would it fell him? Maybe not.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
To what end? If you were to say one or the other of them is picking a fight, sure, but what benefit does having a fake falling out serve?
It wouldn't be a singular benefit, but benefits. As long as both parties have their own interests being advanced, they don't need a singular.
As for specific potential benefits: the clearest benefit is for Elon getting to politically distance himself from Trump and Doge as he returns back to being 'just' a business man and the various other actors who might want to capitalize on a Trump-Musk 'split.' Benefits to Trump are more nuanced, but could serve an internal political party management- the nominal straw that is breaking Trump-Musk is the budget, annd this could be used as a circle-the-wages call (demand) to get the Republicans on board to pass the bill despite the fiscal conservative objections.
If this was a coordinated break, however, I imagine it would be to bait the Democrats in Congress towards the Epstein file that Musk called attention to. This feud is the insinuation that it incriminates Trump, which is catnip to the Dems, but if this were coordinated, then both parties could know that Trump himself is not condemned, but also that other (mutual) political opponents might be. If the Epstein file was released by Trump directly, it could be dismissed as a political attack fabrication. If the Democrats 'force' it open during Congressional hearing discovery, they'd be owning the responsibility / consequence for any fallout. When you consider how MeToo ended up scalping more notable Democrats than Republicans....
(And- at the same time- the previous individual benefits listed above.)
To be clear- this isn't saying/claiming this is the reason. Merely that this is an example of a political ploy a fake falling out could serve.
More options
Context Copy link
Remember that weird moment when Colbert announced that Comey had been fired by Trump? The audience cheered, before being corrected by Colbert that Comey was now a good guy and was to be lionized if you're anti-Trump (the updated narrative which went on for the next month or so in the media).
So it potentially helps Elon to some extent, to make a more dramatic break from Trump with big WWF promos cut from both of them. It depends on how the media plays it, but this could be the same kind of whiplash that erases a fair amount of elon derangement among democrats and lets him slip out of washington with a bit more independent posture intact.
Hmm, this brings to mind the old chestnut about how Howard Hughes used to denounce all of his former executives when they left his employ. If I remember the story correctly, this was a deliberate ploy on Hughes' part. Said employee would then sue Hughes for defamation and Hughes would settle, thereby giving his former employee a large sum of cash that was, thanks to the court involvement, free of taxation.
That's insane but also almost admirable.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You could see this playing out in modern satire, or satire in modern intrigue fiction. The BBB has sections in it, Stephen Miller's posted on this, expanding the authority of the executive in deportations. It would go, the media will care more about the Trump-Elon alliance breaking and Elon's very public tantrum than something dastardly buried in the bill, so fake a fight, and go loud and brash so it's not "insider sources" but the men themselves who force the story. Bill is passed and signed, Trump and Musk post a picture shaking hands with the caption "lol pranked" and the administration proceeds with using whatever new authority they've been granted.
But that is (probably) not how the world works, and I think @nopie has described the truth of it.
To be sure, I was saying how I would act and it would be a similar tantrum like what Elon does. But I am no politician nor a successful man and I don't know if Elon's actions will be ultimately victorious or destructive. The later is more likely. But his track record shows the opposite. Obviously, we don't understand the world well enough to predict the outcome. But from what we know, the world has a potential of unlimited growth. We are in a different era now, the humanity in all of its history was static, with no growth or very little growth over centuries, but then something changed and rapid growth appeared. It started with the industrial revolution and the world has never been the same since.
Musk vs Trump is the new world vs the old one. The new world will win for sure but expect many battles.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Really? Two unbelievably arrogant, thin-skinned men? Who fell into a buddy relationship so quickly? This was the most predictable thing in the world.
More options
Context Copy link
Not staged, it is real.
Obviously, many things said in anger now, can and will be taken back. Don't take them too seriously. But the fight is real.
It's almost like negotiating these things in public isn't done for a reason or something, especially in the Internet Age.
If you understand how to deal with people that work that way (or aren't one of those people whose salary/political standing depends on you not knowing how to do that), you probably really aren't that concerned. They'll probably rapidly screw around and reach a settlement in a few months, just like the last time.
But maybe I'm weird and find that that "cutting subsidies that allow people to buy inferior electric cars pisses off rich guy whose fortune(s) lie partially in those cars" is not particularly interesting news. At least, it's not interesting yet, no consequences beyond the inevitable stock market dip.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'm pretty sure the part where Elon started insinuating Trump is a pedo wasn't staged:
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link