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 -
Let's talk shitty policing!
The story starts back in August, when police (specifically, Adams County Sherriff's Department of Ohio) raided the home of Joseph "Afroman" Foreman on a warrant for narcotics and kidnapping. Perhaps they thought that the author of "Because I got high" would be a slam dunk, but they walked out with a couple roaches and a few grand in cash.
https://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/adams-county/rapper-afromans-ohio-home-raided-by-adams-county-sheriffs-office
When they discovered a grand total of jack and shit, they were forced to return most of the money, except the stuff they stole.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/adams-county-sheriff-comes-up-400-short-returning-cash-to-afroman-after-home-raid/ar-AA14IJPa
Reason covered the case here:
https://reason.com/2022/12/05/cops-return-cash-seized-from-afroman-in-bogus-drug-raid-with-400-missing/
And the man himself has weighed in with a music video that is all security footage of the raid titled "Will you help me repair my door?"
https://youtube.com/watch?v=oponIfu5L3Y
Down with qualified immunity, the legalized piracy known as civil asset forfeiture, and the self-funding militarized security state.
This is a pretty shitty thing to be able to do, and this would absolutely be a cause worth fighting for...
...the problem is that the whole concept of police reform is now inextricably linked in the minds of at least half the populace with total police abolition, lighter sentences, less bail, decriminalising hard drugs, violent criminals out on the streets by lunchtime, rioting, arson, looting, violent takeover of city streets and public areas and anti-white ideology. The whole subject is fucking radioactive now. I wouldn't lend my name to any such cause, for fear that it would, like nearly all causes, massively expand its mandate beyond the very specific issue I want to correct. I don't want to empower any of the other garbage.
In the UK, we have different problems, in that our police don't spend any time investigating actual crimes like burglaries, but will happily waste days and weeks chasing down speech crimes on twitter or illegal football stream watchers, but there's the same obstacle to overcoming them. To even breach the subject would require, at least to me, some kind of cast-iron guarantee that whoever was overseeing the reform was 120% free of any sort of wokery whatsoever, and that's something I can say about almost nobody in our political class. Myself and a lot of other right-wing people I talk to sense the formalisation of the two-tier quasi-racialised justice system that we already suspect exists is pretty imminent.
The trust is completely gone, and there's very little I can think of that would bring it back.
Good news: Most of these positions have effectively zero public support, with the possible exception of bail reform.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/10/26/growing-share-of-americans-say-they-want-more-spending-on-police-in-their-area/
This poll was done at the height of the Floyd riots.
https://www.ipsos.com/en-us/news-polls/reuters-ipsos-civil-unrest-george-floyd-2020-06-02
A similar number of Americans (79%) say that the property damage caused by some demonstrators undermines the original intent of the protest’s call for justice in George Floyd’s death.
Republicans (83%) and Democrats (77%) agree that property damage ultimately undermines the cause of the demonstrators.
And yet it all happened anyway, with the media cheerleading it on while running cover, and authorities tripping over themselves to declare racism a pandemic to enable people to break coof rules to go out and continue doing it.
More options
Context Copy link
When you're talking about "effectively zero public support", effectively supporting is very different from explicitly supporting. People can say "I don't want violence", but have standards which, in effect, enable violence.
No, I mean that these positions are as likely to ascent to power as the Mises wing Libertarian party. Sure, some people probably want their neighborhoods looted and burned to the ground. I'm not especially worried about them gaining a consensus.
My understanding is that, while plenty of the rioters were tourists, it was mostly poor majority-minority neighborhoods that took the brunt of the damage, with the rest hitting downtown areas and almost none in affluent suburbs.
My takeaway was 'guns remain an amazing deterrent against mob violence, at least as long ss you're the local majority'
More options
Context Copy link
And when the next round of race riots erupts will the police and national guard be allowed to put them down or not?
Floyd was after the original Fergusson riots. There were the LA riots in the 90's and of course the 70s race riots. It seems like the consensus is to let them happen. Any electoral victories the Republicans get will be temporary if even that. Even after The Floyd riots; Biden won the election, and the Republicans couldn't even take the Senate in the mid-terms.
Biden is one of the architects of civil asset forfeiture in the first place. There are many reasons why any one person may have voted for him, but criminal justice reform is not going to be at the top of their list.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The point is that people may not want their neighborhoods burned down, but they may support policies whose effect is to make it easier to burn down their neigborhoods.
(And it's not as clearcut as that anyway, or you'd never get even 20%. 20% isn't big, but it's far more than the lizardman constant.)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
What does polling matter when the policy we got are the things you say poll poorly.
Part of it is we did have a George Soros coup of DA offices. Where relatively modest money could win those offices when no one was paying attention.
And places like San Fran have legalized hard drugs.
I mean it’s cool people say they don’t like the stuff but it’s become the policy of the land.
What did Soros or his foundation do?
More options
Context Copy link
This conflates national and federal polities. And at the Federal level, you have the Koch and Federalist cartels to undermine the public for conservatives, balancing things out. The US is a divided nation, but its between 60/40 and 50/50. Nevertheless, what flies in California won't pass muster in Alabama.
What have the Koch and federalist cartels done that balances out the progressive sweep of da offices? Or the capture of academia - hell, all of education?
Also what do you mean by this?
Yeah. Something like 90+% are liberals, which is super unhealthy. I imagine its not that different in Hollywood.
I think echo chambers like themotte have a skewed perception of reality ie lots of doomerism over the intellectually bankrupt ideology that can broadly be described as "wokeism". It's a problem, but polling suggests its near the fringes.
The nation is approximately 50% Democrat; 50% Republican. The commenter I was responding to was hesitant to endorse legislation he agrees with because it is too ideologically aligned with people who want to see more arson, looting, and violent crime. This strikes me as insane, and, at the very least, is contradicted by whatever data we have. Unsurprisingly, only a small minority of people want their neighborhoods burned to the ground while they are hunted by violent criminals.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
These things don’t poll well anywhere but yet they happened. Black communities wanted more policing but less and more murder.
Also everyone is going to say they don’t want anti-white ideology. But many support affirmative action or picking a Supreme Court justice because she’s black and female. Promoting blacks ahead of whites is just anti white ideology yet no one is going to come out and say they are anti-white.
The goalposts were
The data indicate that, for most of these things, public support falls a far south 50%. ~85% of Americans want police funding to remain the same or increase. More people want it to increase substantially than to decrease substantially.
Ok so what’s your point? I agree public support is lower. But we got those policies anyway.
Imagine describing to an alien that the official policy of the US is to abolish the police, decrimnalize hard drugs, endorse looting, arson, rioting, the release of violent criminals, and the violent take over of streets. Do you think they would have a accurate picture of policy in the USA?
More options
Context Copy link
~15% tracks pretty well to the places that got such policies. The ones where people would rather not, largely didn't.
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
When the French government abolished the death penalty in 1981, the majority of the French people opposed this move. Yet it still happened. A democracy steamroling popular opinion, to be lenient towards criminals isn't unprecedented.
Mentioning for our American readers just because it's a fun fact... The guillotine continued to be the French method of execution until the end of capital punishment. The last person to be guillotined in France was in 1977.
More options
Context Copy link
I'm sure exceptions to the rule exist, but we should deal in probabilities and stive for accurate piors. The president ran on being against the death penalty, and was elected. In my examples, I'm talking about sub 20% popular support. I don't know what it was in France.
More options
Context Copy link
They still do by the way, a 2020 survey put it at 55% support.
When some claim the death penalty to be "Sensible Centrism" they're not kidding.
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