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 -
Roth may be the scariest person I have ever come across in my entire life. A straight out of comic book QANON casting Jewish Gay Grooming Pedohpile who actually controls all speech proclaiming that his type doesn’t exists.
I don’t know if he’s actually a groomer; I do feel very confident that he’s completely out of touch with most America. Lots of negative kid vibes. Maybe he just writes and tweets a lot so easy to dig up something but he still seems to be not representative of society.
Musk should probably tone it down some and not risks alienated users. It would be better to maintain a strong platform.
In my view, 50/50 he has committed criminal sexual acts. He posted a lot of very edgy jokes on Twitter.
And logic dictates when you put someone somewhere to censor content, you want someone who will be easy to handle, hence, a guy whom you know to be a nonce is the logical choice.
Meanwhile, FBI has about 16 ex* employees working at Twitter in various senior positions.
*I'm not sure people ever 'leave' such agencies, same way as people never really leave the Mob without disappearing entirely.
Yes, federal employees absolutely leave their former agencies and are no longer bound by anything but (in the case of those who held security clearances) their lifetime obligation not to disclose classified information. US federal agencies do not in any way "own" former employees, nor they do they make them "disappear."
And you do believe this unironically ?
Yes. I have factual reason to believe this. What is your basis for believing otherwise?
It's generally not true in other countries. People get attached to the their classmates, former companies and so on.
Well, first of all, the United States has very different norms, and stricter regulations, about federal service.
Second, people getting attached to their classmates and former companies is not the argument you made. Of course ex-feds maintain a professional and social network that typically includes other current and former feds. But you were claiming something much different, that they constitute in effect a "Mob" that they not only do not but cannot really leave, and that their former agencies can still compel them to do work for them after they've left. This is flatly untrue.
Strict ? You have generals retiring and then getting cushy board or consultant positions at defence contractors.
There's the infamous 'revolving door' problem at all kinds of agencies.
I should've been more clear- what I had in mind was more that these are special jobs that confer life-long status by association, and that people who've gone through them typically have a specific outlook and set of contacts that make them unique.
However-
We know feds compel people who fucked up to serve them. They're called confidential informants.
Is this a practice that cannot be used on agents who messed up ? Say, some boss 'misplaces' a crucial piece of evidence, agent is exonerated.
Retires, but knows he'll be asked to do favors for feds, unless he wants that piece accidentally found during an unrelated investigation..
A different problem (and I agree it's a problem) but the coziness of the defense industry with the military, like the way in which former congressmen and senators exit to become highly paid lobbyists for the companies they used to legislate, is not related to what you were claiming.
Well yes, but how is that different from any other specialized job? Ex-military (especially in elite branches like special forces) also enjoy a unique outlook and set of contacts. Everyone knows having a security clearance (or having formerly held a security clearance) is itself a valuable thing to put on your resume. But again, not the thing you were claiming.
They're also called criminals. Not the same thing.
It has certainly has happened that a military or federal employee caught conducting espionage has been "turned" into a double agent under threat of prosecution. Other than that, I don't know what you mean by "agents who messed up." If they messed up badly enough to be prosecuted, they might be forced to cooperate in order to avoid or lighten their prosecution. If they simply got fired, then the government has no further leverage on them.
Your scenario - an agent "messes up" and rather than prosecuting them, their agency holds onto the evidence to extort them into doing favors for them in the future - sounds very unlikely. What kind of "evidence" do you imagine would fit this criteria? If it's espionage, that agent is not being given a pass so he can go work in the private sector as a secret "asset." Same deal if it's anything else seriously illegal like child porn or rape or murder. Assuming some lesser offense, what exactly would the agent's former employer have them do? Go work for Twitter and push moderation buttons for them? And the ex-fed is going to do this because... otherwise the evidence he could have been prosecuted for will resurface? Except he now has a lawyer who will raise awkward questions about why he's being prosecuted now, for some bullshit charge like soliciting or drug use or misappropriation or whatever else they have on him. Do you see how much this doesn't make sense?
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link