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 -
If you want to consider it a denial of the event, then, fine, but it's not a denial that something equally evil was committed. Would the Columbine shooters and/or their actions have been more evil if they successfully blew up their school and slaughtered all the police officers who showed up in response, as they (delusionally) planned to? Shooting random people was their Plan B, which they resorted to because their bombs didn't go off. I think their Plan B is just as evil as their Plan A would have been, because murder is murder.
Denying that the German government, under the rule of the Nazi party, deliberately murdered Jewish people for the sole crime of being Jewish. However, I consider any death that occurred in the concentration camps to be a deliberate murder, so long as the death was caused by the conditions in the camp. If the Nazis abducted 200,000 Jews and placed them in prisons where they died of starvation or typhus, I would not see it as morally different from the Nazis gassing 6,000,000 Jews with Zyklon B. It's still a murder of an excessive number of people because of their bloodline. That's genocide. That's the evil of the Holocaust.
Absolutely.
The details matter for historical purposes. Not for moral ones.
I don't want a conservative who denies the Holocaust! I know that millions of Jews were murdered by the Nazis. I just want a conservative who doesn't morally castigate people for disagreeing over details of a historical event, use mistake theory instead of conflict theory when someone does a wrongthink, or say that Holocaust revisionism/human biodiversity/etc are right to be condemned on moral (and not just factual) grounds while it's okay to Just Ask Questions about vaccines or gender identity. You can't criticize the left for silencing dissent, then turn around and do the same, without being a hypocrite.
Who said anything about that?
More options
Context Copy link