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'm sure as hell not a self-hating leftist, but to me it seems far more reasonable to blame this on upbringing and environment social group than it does genes. If race hadn't been mentioned, I probably would've assumed he was white, because that's my default mental image of a pro wrestler. Granted, I haven't followed the scene in years, so I'll freely admit it's based on wrestlers who are all retired at this point, I'm sure.
My point stands: I don't see any reason personally to consider this a "race" thing rather than a "son of a pro wrestler" thing, even if "not all wrestlers" (for instance, based on reading Mankind's autobiography, I'd have been very surprised if one of his kids pulled this, although I'd not have been as surprised if it was an anecdote about his own youth).
There are plenty of people who have harsh upbringings who don't turn out to be violent retards. There are also people who inherit their parents violent genes and are much more likely to become violent retards despite good upbringing.
Everything is 'about race' because there is no environment without genetic expression happening within it. Black people as a group in America are a lot more prone to violence than whites or asians. This event falls within that context and is therefor a part of that wider pattern.
Beyond that fact this is not a matter of personal opinion. But if we were to put our own spin on it, I'd argue that the post-attack rant by Raja exemplifies exactly what kind of person he is and the characteristics of many young violent people: Self centered, egotistical, lacking in empathy and willing to express their emotions through physical acts of violence without any intervening thought for what comes next after assaulting a human being.
On top of that you have the typical black tribalism on display. With black former WWE star Mark Henry making mealy mouthed excuses for the incident on behalf of Raja. Raja being a 25 year old adult with experience in combat sports, who knowingly and willfully punched a human being into a coma, and gave them serious brain damage.
There is always a reason to engage with reality.
More options
Context Copy link
The key feature of the “upbringing and environment” you’re referring to are also in part, his inherited genes
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link