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 -
The economics of air travel are not immediately obvious. It’s not just distance/duration. Route availability and the density of the endpoints are even more important because airplanes and their infrastructure are so expensive. I wouldn’t think this is a particular Thai advantage.
Though it is funny to see bitching about airline prices followed by a complaint that it’s too cheap. And you’re not even worried that it’s a bubble or something—no, you’re scared of visa jumpers? That’s less credible than the traditional complaints about tourists. I feel confident that the US-UK routes are not a significant contribution to either country’s illegal immigrants.
Your story makes me think of the stereotypical “gap year” amongst privileged college students. Only in that case, any insights about America’s bizarre economy are far more likely to grant an affinity for socialism. It’s enough to make me wonder how your policy prescription looks.
I think its more that about the Eternal September of international travel driven by price and accessibility. In the old times they were sending their best for work and tourism. Now, not so much.
/pol/ was making a lot of hay about Thailand and more recently Philippines allowing 'short term' visa free entry from India for example.
I do find it interesting how as international tourism gets more accessible to upwardly mobile developing nations their tourists tend to catch a lot of flak for visibility and doing undesired things. Chinese arguably got the most 20 years ago (though as somebody who travels a lot I think they've worked out most of the rough edges now), then Indians now since there's such a large mostly-affluent population. Even in my own experience I find that rich Africans (from Africa) tend to be some of the absolute worst in terms of obnoxiousness and interactions with service staff, but I assume that's downstream of the Nigerians I see being 1%ers in their own country and that being their typical cultural modus operandi around service staff.
I too remember the wave of Chinese mainlanders popping across to Hong Kong and the locals' reactions to young ladies wearing $10k+ outfits encouraging their toddlers to defecate out on the street.
Yeah like I'm not saying Africans are at some particular personal civility deficit but I feel like they're currently in the spot of just now being affluent enough and having enough of an upper class that you'll notice them. Give it another 20-30 years and it'll probably normalize.
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