site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022

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.

16
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

CAN YOU RECOGNIZE LEFT-WINGERS FROM RIGHT-WINGERS FROM FACE ALONE?

I've seen numerous people on Twitter etc. claim that they can indeed do this, so I've created a quiz to test this claim. This quiz has 20 Finnish MP's essentially selected randomly (I took their photos from the Parliament's webpage, organized them alphabetically using medium icons and then just removed the middle part of this collage, leaving a bit over 20 photos: after removing the Swedish People's Party members for not fitting the ideological scale that well and taking one out for wearing a party pin, I was left with exactly 20 photos). Note: pics are displayed in randomized order.

The MP's represent six parties, but all you have to do here is select: Left or Right? Those representing the parties Social Democrats, Greens and Left Alliance are Left, those representing the parties Centre, National Coalition and The Finns are Right.

I will offer one hint: you cannot use tie color/dress color (ie. politicians wearing party-color dresses and ties) to make consistently correct guesses.

Missed opportunity for "Finnish" button.

10/20. (Tried to look only at the facial features). At that, I had near 100% mistake ratio in the beginning, and since your quiz provides instant feedback (IMO it shouldn't), I seem to have calibrated on the go for whatever signal there is in this data, instead of using any priors.

How extreme is your set, policy-wise? It is plausible that physiognomy doesn't work in reasonable (boring centrist) political systems. It can only work in principle when politics follow from some biological ground truth, and that implies divergence that begins far below the level of intelligent analysis and personal experience, the stuff of gut feelings, moral foundations and broad outlook – the product of gender, and hormones, and norms of reaction, crudely bundling together propositions that can well diverge under scrutiny. (Moreover, the absence of party choice crushes nuance and disincentivizes people with nuanced opinions from rising through the ranks).

In the US, a «left-winger» politician who can be robustly identified even without tribal dress or markings (to the extent that can be isolated) is someone like Lori Lightfoot or Scott Wiener; archetypal right-wingers are abundant in team Trump. Those are people far from the center of the Overton window, approaching street and campus combatants and appealing to the sentiment of such crowds. And in general, I think, American politics is more identitarian, racial, hormonal, biological than it should be in normal human societies.

Your set, meanwhile, looks like normie bureaucrats with some policy or platform differences, sorted into that line of work by common mechanisms that make white-collar people want to bother with governance.

For example, let's take your right-most party:

The Finns Party,[4][5][6] formerly known as the True Finns (Finnish: Perussuomalaiset, PS, Swedish: Sannfinländarna, Sannf.),[note 1] is a right-wing populist political party in Finland.

Ville Pernaa, political scientist, described the party's 2015 electoral program by saying that the Finns Party combines elements of both right-wing and left-wing politics along with populist rhetoric.

The party's supporters have described themselves as centrists.[74] The party has drawn people from left-wing parties but central aspects of their manifesto[75] have gained support from right-wing voters as well.[76][77][note 3] The Finns Party has been compared by international media to the other Nordic populist parties and other similar nationalist and right-wing populist movements in Europe, whilst noting its strong support for the Finnish welfare state.[80][81][72]

The Finns Party has proposed more progressivity to taxes to avoid the establishment of flat taxation. The party has called for the raising of the capital gains tax and the re-institution of the wealth tax. According to the party, the willingness to pay taxes is best guaranteed by a society unified by correct social policies – the electoral program warns against individualist policies, which weaken the solidarity among citizens. "The willingness to pay taxes is guaranteed by having a unified people", the program reads (p. 46).[85]

Removal of the obligatory character of the second official language (Swedish in Finnish-language schools and vice versa) in curriculums on all levels of education, freeing up time for the learning of other foreign languages such as English, German, French, Spanish and Russian (especially in the eastern part of the country).

Those folks are, dare I say, National Socialists. Americans do not have National Socialists outside of jails and obscure extremist forums – they have high-T red-faced boors who advocate for generalized Pride In Our Team, and tax cuts for the rich (because Screw Them Parasites), and Religion, and generalized distrust of weirdoes and aliens and loquacious eggheads, and who like Strong Masculine Leaders Who Tell It Like It Is.

Biological methods work best in the realm of biological phenomena. Nothing new here.

...But I would like to test this hypothesis with American politicians. Can someone assemble, say, 40 of the less-known ones?

Scott Wiener

If this guy was a German, I would peg him as an FDP politician, a market liberal.