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 pure hypothetical thought experiment: imagine it occurs that the Pfizer mRNA vaccination + all booster follow-ups (4+ shots) regimen is disastrous to health, and has a high 10-year mortality rate. In other words, those who strictly adhered to the recommended CDC/Pfizer vaccination schedule have a 25% of dying by the decade’s end, or some such risk. What would be the public’s response and what would be the just punishment for those involved?
I think in such a hypothetical, the whole political climate of 21st century neo-neoliberalism will be fundamentally altered. There would be a huge rightward shift on distrust to authorities, especially but not limited to scientists and public health authorities. I don’t think the public would be satisfied with Fauci and other heads being tried, and will demand sentences for the thousands of individuals involved in the decision similar to what we would see in the Nuremberg trials. This would also fundamentally change the political climate, as the “vax-maxxed” lean left.
Not only do i agree with @whiningcoil that nothing will happen, bit i also dont expect that the unvaxxed will lauded for their foresight. I imagine there will be even more animosity and perhaps even violence direct at unvaxxed people since they did not take on the risk that the rest of society did. I think that sentiment was always driving the cruel policies for the unvaxxed. We chose not to accept the risks for the good of society and are in their mind, freeriding on everyone else.
Thats why I still keep my vax status to myself to nearly everyone except family.
This is pretty amazing, considering that the data has become so overwhelming that it has necessitated a change in narrative that has even shown through in legal arguments. When the gov't argued for their employee mandate in front of the en banc fifth circuit a few months ago, it was no longer, "This is necessary to prevent transmission in the workplace," because it's now undeniable that vaccination prevents neither infection nor transmission. It was a stark contrast to the arguments over the OSHA vaccine in SCOTUS. Then, the justices were entertaining ideas like, "It's similar to if you have a dangerous machine that is spurting dangerous chemicals all over the place that could end up on other employees." Now, there no talk of that at all. Instead, the gov't had to basically leave the point stand and retreat back to, "...but we still think vaccination is the best way to prevent serious cases/death to individuals."
Of course, now that that's the new battleground, the court had some wicked hypos like, "Could the gov't mandate that all employees get below a particular BMI by a specified date or be fired? Obesity is a huge crisis in society, causing all sorts of disease/death, and surely that causes inefficiency in gov't operations [which is the "federal nexus" they're trying to use]?" We can only hope that these facts take root in the public consciousness as well (and that the fifth circuit nixes another authoritarian mandate).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link