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 -
A common flavor of mockery is to find leftist posts about "what I'll do after the socialist revolution" and ridicule them. We were discussing the genre and the general amusement at folks that think they will have a quasi-aristocratic life: oh I'll work on the commune garden and teach embroidery and prepare meals for everyone. Weirdly, many of the posts by women ended up being weirdly trad too -- but that's a bit of a sidetrack.
Example
KYM
My friend had an important insight: there is probably a rightist/reactionary equivalent to this. That's a good observation. We came up with a few of these
It's a common criticism levied at reactionaries that they imagine themselves as aristocrats instead of the masses, but I don't think it connects because it's just not accurate. And in fact I think it's mostly projection, or the sort of attempt at symmetry that you're doing here, a common feature (and demand) of liberal ideology.
What more commonly animates reactionary thought is a desire for normalcy and a return to an understandable order of things. In fact it is more commonly a desire to escape politics and not have to deal with one's social order being constantly upended. The story is all too common: "I just wanted to play video games".
If you actually look at the ideas, the reactionary thesis is that most people do not desire to participate in politics and that the job of a respectable aristocracy is to fulfill this demand. Mass politics is a leftist import that only really features in syncretic forms of reaction like fascism.
On this question, consider Wyndham Lewis' The Art of Being Ruled.
As for the more general consideration that the people who wish for more constraining social norms may chafe at too constricting ones, it seems as fallacious to me as pointing out that the people who demand slightly more liberal social norms may fall prey to anomie if all norms are destroyed.
A decent and stable equilibrium is what the object of desire here. The question of the dynamics and as to which direction for nomos is the slippery one has to be seriously examined for this to have any teeth. But I believe one will easily find that it is easy to destroy things and hard to create them, even social norms.
Now to compare this back to the yearning of communists for communism, it seems categorically different. Communists have a very specific and deliberate eschatology that most non revolutionaries do not have an equivalent to. And it is that yearning and that eschaton that are laughable, not the general desire for social improvement. Nobody ever laughed at lefties for desiring decent healthcare at an affordable price.
Right, and to the extent that Communists believe they will be governed by enlightened and benevolent socialist rulers, reactionaries believe they will be governed by respectable and benevolent aristocrats. Neither has a desire to participate in politics assuming that those with power will simply do it correctly.
The reality for the poor reactionary is that he's more likely to get a venal, greedy or scheming lord as he is to get a benevolent one, and he'll quickly remember why everyone got so sick of it and overthrew them.
This is just not true, communists want to participate in politics and this is a key component of their ideology. They don't want any rulers. And they want everyone down to small groups to rule themselves democratically.
The dictatorship of the proletariat is a transitional artifice to allow the state to wither away, if you remember. There is no "correct ruler". There is only the required politicization of the masses to the death until history finally synthesizes the perfect society.
I won't relitigate here the "but what if you get a bad king?" question since that's a matter over which large amounts of ink have been spilled and it is irrelevant to this discussion of the teleology of either ideology.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
This seems to have been the thesis statement of South Park republicanism until the showrunners began pouring most of their time into depicting Donald Trump being raped or otherwise humiliated. This may or may not have evolved into the modern day “radical centrism” popular with rdrama, where the only real terminal value seems to be not taking politics too seriously. See also people who are “grill pilled” and the like.
While I don’t blame Trump for this, his election has led to the politicization of damn near everything in society, presumably because he symbolizes a threat to the left that their capture of institutions is not as inevitable as they may have thought. We live in a world where Marvel comics have been written and drawn portraying Donald Trump as the villain MODOK, without a trace of irony. At least Genesis was self aware enough to use a Ronald Reagan puppet in their Land of Confusion music video.
I strongly agree, and the similar criticism that libertarians are “temporarily embarrassed millionaires” has long grated me as leftist projection. To the more extreme leftists, everything seems to be about power, often at the expense of principles. “No bad methods, only bad targets” and the like. It never once occurred to me, in my idealistic youth, that I should be voting “in my interest,” except in the esoteric sense that I supported constitutional republicanism and limited government involvement in people’s lives.
I certainly didn’t think of myself as a future millionaire. I mostly thought of myself as someone who wants to be left alone, by the government, by institutional powers, by everyone, and for others to have that same freedom. An old, forgotten soldier of the white capitalist patriarchy in a time when children my age were holding school assemblies to celebrate Barack Obama’s inauguration.
So to a certain kind of person, I suppose they can’t imagine why anyone who isn’t rich would support the freedom of rich people. They must be boot lickers or aspire to be rich themselves.
More options
Context Copy link
This is it. After the (imaginary) authoritarian socialcon revolution, I'll let my kids roam free in our safe, crime free neighborhood, I'll let them attend public schools without fear of them absorbing enemy propaganda. I'll work a normal middle class drone job (like I do now). I just want to be free to live my small traditional peasant life and raise my family among the same. I don't want to be a warlord or a artist. I just want to grill.
All of which, from a leftist activist perspective, constitute an unspeakable horror, of course.
Without an explanation of why, this feels like outgroup booing. Do you mean because the structures that make such an existence become invisible, and then invisible oppression? Or because there needs to be a consciousness raising among the people who live there? Or because not everyone will be able to live there, and those who inherited it have unearned privilege? Or for some other reason?
"The personal is political."
More options
Context Copy link
"crime free neighborhoods" = helpless BIPOC languishing under the boot of a racist, murderous police
"public schools without enemy propaganda" = drag queens and honest LGBT activists and educators being barred from schools by homophobic, transphobic goons
"I just want to grill" = LGBT people and BIPOC suffering discrimination and oppression day and night while heartless normies don't give a crap
" I just want to be free to live my small traditional peasant life and raise my family among the same." = no tax money to be spent on muh programs and affirmative action
More effort than just a laundry list of strawmen, please. This isn't an argument or an answer, it's just "My outgroup is always evil and lying about everything."
More options
Context Copy link
Your ability to attack strawman is unmatched, congratulations on your gold medal
I can do it too!
“Crime-free neighborhoods” = The only way you hit ‘zero crime’ is permanent curfew, door-to-door gun raids, and AI cameras tracking every cough.
“Public schools without enemy propaganda” = Public schools are union-run psy-ops that’ve been red-pilling kids for Marx since Dewey. Burn the system down, hand parents vouchers, and let the free market homeschool ’em.
“I just want to grill” = While you’re basting Costco rib-eyes, the CCP buys our farmland and the EPA writes a methane tax on your Weber. join the county militia— or enjoy your bug-burger future.
“I just want to live my small traditional peasant life and raise my family among the same.” = you fell for the WEF ‘15-minute serfdom’ pitch. They’ll fence your hamlet, meter your tractor diesel, and trade your barn for carbon credits while Davos elites keep their Gulfstreams. ‘Back to the land’ is code for ‘stay in your lane, prole.’
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