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 -
Well, Gaetz argument is “what is the use of power if it will never be used to accomplish our stated goals?”
So why is that dysfunctional? This is the one time he can probably get concessions for his political goals and he is doing so. The demands actually aren’t that unrealistic (and would probably be a good thing from a governor perspective ab initio). Parties aren’t about getting power for the sake of power. They are about getting power for the sake of accomplishing certain tasks.
In 2021, AOC and the squad voted for Nancy Pelosi for speaker, despite noisily disagreeing with her, and went on to enjoy the privileges of being part of a functioning majority. Compared to a non-functioning Congress or a Republican speaker, this helped accomplish their stated goals (notably by passing several huge spending bills).
If Gaetz and the Freedom Caucus vote for McCarthy they will help accomplish their stated goals (based on Gaetz's speech nominating Jordan, these seem to be passing the bills that need passing, standing firm against the Senate and White House on the budget, and investigating Deep State corruption) compared to a non-functioning Congress or a Democratic speaker - because these are goals which require being in the majority. Based on this Reason article the main substantive demands include bringing a non-serious agenda (a balanced budget, a large tax cut, a large spending increase on border security, and an unconstitutional term limits law) up for a vote. This obviously doesn't advance Gaetz's stated goals, because it doesn't do anything at all except make noise and waste floor time. I can't work out what the procedural demands the Freedom Caucus are making which McCarthy hasn't conceded (he has conceded on the Motion to Vacate issue, agreeing that any five Congressmen should be able to force a vote to remove him).
If the Freedom Caucus want to get more of their agenda through, they need more power, which means more seats. If a group of 20 reps can overrule 188 reps by threatening to throw their toys out of the pram, then this works for everyone - and the RINOest 20 reps have a stronger negotiating position than the Freedom Caucus, because they can cut a deal with the Dems.
Of course, it is possible that the Freedom Caucus are not seeking to advance their stated goals. Some people just want to watch the world burn, and it isn't that surprising if 20 of them got elected to Congress. There is also the ever-present possibility that politicians are grandstanding rather than trying to advance policy goals. (Never!) But if this is grandstanding, it is an unusually dysfunctional kind - AOC and other anti-establishment Congressmen managed to grandstand without gumming up the election of a Speaker.
At least some members of the freedom caucus probably expect to benefit politically from shutting the government down and preventing anything from getting done. Presumably no rinos or democrats do.
More options
Context Copy link
Did it? What goals did AOC obtain?
Well this happened. I see trillions of spending that AOC supported and Republicans opposed there, much of which benefitted her constituents. None of it would have happened with a non-functioning Congress or a Republican speaker. I can also hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth by conservatives who don't like it, and even by Republican squishes like McCarthy. (I also think that the success of the Squad in Democratic primaries and in media noisemaking after their elections has contributed to a vibe shift among Democrats which pushed Biden and Pelosi leftwards in a way that isn't as immediately obvious as a big fight over the Speakership).
If you mean "What goals did AOC obtain that Pelosi opposed then you are asking the wrong question. People don't, or at least shouldn't, go into politics to count coup against their own parties. They shouldn't, but often do, go into politics to induce wailing and gnashing of teeth on the other side of the aisle. They do and should go into politics to pass bills they support and that benefit their constituents.
AOC couldn't beat Pelosi because she didn't have the votes. So she took what she could get, which worked out at more money than you could shake a stick at plus the stick. The same applies to Gaetz vs McCarthy. If he wants more power he should win more votes.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link