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 -
I would be amusing if out of retaliation Musk banned Biden
I am not sure why social networks need to act as arbiters of political matters or accuracy (such as determining what constitutes as Covid misinformation). Perhaps it's for fear of losing advertiser revenue if perceived as being too complacent about purported extremism. Pre-2016 it seemed like this was not as much of a problem. Now it's not just about social networking, but being a planform for government officials and the media.
I think that would be a really, really bad move. And not all that amusing, either.
More options
Context Copy link
The motive is more direct and personal: It’s not arbitration if you are already sure it’s the truth.
I think a lot of analysis of media bias overlooks this concept. It’s more appealing to posit a conspiracy or at least a class struggle. But the banal explanation is simpler.
Given that Twitter already influences The Discourse, its employees feel a perfectly normal tribal obligation to use that influence. On seeing something bad, stopping it feels good. For those who saw Trump as getting away with murder, so to speak, that meant trying to apply any sort of consequence. It’s the old “I know it when I see it” test from obscenity law.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link