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 -
What's the argument for cooperation? Recent developments have convinced a lot of Republicans that the existing system is no longer workable. Will cooperating help fix that regrettable state, or will it simply enable the forces that created it?
Conversely, what important work is this obstructionism blocking? If they all fell in line, what desirable outcomes might we reasonably predict?
Suppose a number of Republicans defect and elect a democrat speaker. This would likely be a disaster for the Republican party... but the Republican party has already been a disaster for its constituents. The likely long-term outcome seems to me to be a purge of the GOP establishment. Why should this be considered an unacceptable outcome to someone who views the GOP establishment as their enemy?
were oversight and investigation happening? If not, then they aren't being stopped so much as delayed in their start, and my understanding is that one of the questions being answered here is whether they'll start at all, and if started, whether they'll be pursued aggressively.
More options
Context Copy link
It becomes an issue if there's actually some critical, bipartisan matter that needs legislative attention and the GOP's inability to form a governing coalition in the house is the major holdup.
However, as you've noticed and mentioned the issues that get bipartisan support are usually ones that favor the establishment's existing agenda so the only question is whether the voting public will take issue with it or not, I'd say.
With all that said, this entire situation really, REALLY pales in comparison to the revolving door of Prime Ministers that the UK experienced in 2022, so in my mind taking some time to build an actual coalition around an agreeable leader is a very worthwhile endeavor that doesn't reflect poorly on the GOP in and of itself.
True, but they have had two months to do that since the elections, and given the lack of progress to date, including no progress whatsoever during 24 hours of focussed attention on the issue and 6 roll-call votes, it isn't clear how taking more time is going to help.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link