site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 9, 2023

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.

14
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

As far as I'm concerned, as are most actual Economists, the true price of something is simply what people are willing to pay for it.

Unless people are literally unable to find any place to live, I can only offer my condolences if they're priced out of living where they simply want to live.

It seems to me that much of the housing "crisis" in the West arises from attempts to intentionally distort the dynamics of a free market. It might be done with noble aims, or naked NIMBYism, but barring the arrival of effective post-scarcity, we simply can't just give everyone their ideal mansion in the middle of the hottest part of the city.

(This coming from a guy who's girlfriend wants to buy a house in London. My bank account already groans under that demand, but I hold no illusions regarding whether we deserve such accomodation.)

But a place is more than economic abstraction. A working class Londoner that has rented in London since his grand grand father died at Passchendaele for me has more right to live in London compared to the son of an African dictator. It matters how long you have been in a place for me.

You are talking about cultural and family roots. "Rootless cosmopolitans" have thoroughly destroyed such concepts. At least in practice.

The dominant ideology in cities denies any such connection though. A nativist might be able to pull it off, but you can't have atomized global cities without utterly disenfranchising the locals in the medium term.

Nativism applied to an ancient city founded by colonizers absent a pre-existing settlement and who has rights to it can be a fun problem though.