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 -
Well, when you thought the week was boring...
Charlie Kirk was just shot at an event, shooter in custody. There's apparently a video going around of the attack, but I haven't a desire to see it. People who have seen it are suggesting he was shot center mass in the neck, and is likely dead. That makes this the second time that a shooter targeted a conservative political figure at a political event in two years. If Trump hadn't moved his head at the last second, it would've been him, too.
I've never followed the young conservative influencers much, but Kirk always seemed like the moderate, respectable sort -- it's wild that he would be the victim of political violence and not someone like Fuentes.
I fear this is what happens when the culture war is at a fever pitch. Political violence in the US is at heights not seen since the 1970s, from riots in the 2010s and especially 2020 over police-involved shootings, to the capitol riot in 2021, to the attempted assassination of Trump in Pennsylvania, to the United Healthcare killing, to finally this murder of a political influencer. I fear for my country when I look at how divided we are, and how immanently we seem to be sliding into violence.
I guess I just find politics tiring nowadays. I vote for a Democrat and they do stupid things that conspicuously harm the outgroup. I vote for a Republican and they do stupid things that conspicuously harm the outgroup. Whether J.D. Vance or Gavin Newsom wins in 28, there will be no future in which Americans look each other eye to eye.
I actually believe things are much better in this country than people think: our economy is surprisingly resilient, we've never suffered under the kind of austerity that's defined post-colonial European governance, our infrastructure, while declining, actually functions in a way that most of the world isn't blessed with, our medical system is mired in governmental and insurance red tape yet the standard of care and state of medical research is world-class, our capacity to innovate technologically is still real and still compelling, and one of our most pressing political issues, illegal immigration, exists solely because people are willing to climb over rocks and drift on rafts simply to try and live here.
We have real problems. And intense escalations on the part of our political tribes are absolutely in the top five. We also have a severe problem with social atomization -- and these two things are related -- which has led to our intimate relationship and loneliness crisis, the rapid decline in social capital, and the technological solitary confinement of the smartphone screen which dehumanizes people like real solitary confinement while confining them to the most intense narrative possible. "If it bleeds, it leads" means that many will be led into bleeding.
I don't know how we rebuild the world, or come to a point where Americans of different views can view each other as well-intentioned. But Kirk is just the latest victim of a crisis that I don't know if there's any way to solve.
As always, disgusting. As always, it's going to backfire on whatever political positions the perpetrator holds. Dems are either going to have to moderate and cut off crazy fringe to avoid alienating the majority, or they'll just lose. Either way, whatever causes the shooter believed in are worse off for it. Abject stupidity and waste of life.
They will not moderate, they will double down. Their base demands it. All bluesky is now alight in celebration of the murder. There are a lot of reports and posts in public of people celebrating, many more just do it privately. And I am not so convinced they will lose. Madmani seems to be doing pretty well, despite his open support of political violence and his absolutely nutty plans of building New-York SSR. I don't think we have revulsion to political violence as a common value anymore.
I doubt /all/ of them are. I have seen many calls for lowering temperatures, denouncing it, etc. meanwhile I have seen several highly popular right wing facebook groups that seem positively giddy that this might give them some excuse to kill leftists.
It is clear that your purpose in making that statement is political rather than factual.
Of course it's political. We have a party that had been calling all the opponents "Nazis", "enemies of democracy", "worse than Hitler", and thousand more variants, and it had led to a number of murders and attempted murders already (anybody remembers James Hodgkinson?). It's not like it's some kind of random occurrence, a meteor strike out of the blue, a random victim of senseless violence outburst. It's a predictable result of a coordinated and deliberate campaign of hate. Yes, not literally everybody on the left participates in this campaign - but all observable leftist spaces are ripe with it, there are hundreds of examples, and there is no meaningful pushback on it. We know how hard the left can push to drive out an unpopular opinion. This obviously is not one of those opinions. No prominent leftist figure - except for Sen. Fetterman, who is an exception in many cases concerning the left nowdays - had done anything more than rote "oh noes, we don't endorse violence, please keep on keeping on" kind of condemnation. And many of those who is doing rote condemnations now had been participating in the hate campaign days or weeks before. People on the lower rungs of the ladder don't even bother with that - the leftist press if basically "well, he spoke things we didn't like, what do you expect would happen?!" and the masses on social media are like "good job, let's have a celebratory drink, who's next?" Yes, not literally everybody, but enough to see where the dominating vector is pointing to.
So yes, this is a political thing and it's totally appropriate to discuss it as a political thing. It's a political murder.
More options
Context Copy link
The only ones I see denouncing it on leftie spaces are saying “think of the backlash against peaceful democrats”
More options
Context Copy link
I just went on Bluesky with a fresh new account and searched for Kirk and sorted by top and scrolled by around 30 posts before I found one saying the death of Charlie Kirk was wrong and it was still accompanied by "And Charlie Kirk was a horrible, hateful man who spent his life radicalizing young people to embrace their worst demons by targeting women, people of color, immigrants, and the marginalized."
Gavin Newsom did create a series of post trying to lower temperature and denouncing it. The top reply is calling this sympathy stupid because Gavin Newsome had something nice to say about Charlie Kirk. Most of the top replies are talking trash about Charlie Kirk.
We should expect politicians to denounce political violence, as they have skin in the game. The lack of top posts from non politicians showing any sympathy is pretty telling. I scrolled around 100 posts and found 4 sympathetic messages from top democrat leaders/politicians, 2 from people I don't know stating celebrating his death is wrong, like 7-8 news articles and the rest is a mix of gleeful, critical, or who cares messaging. " 80-90% of the top 100 posts celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk is about as close to all as you can in how the word "all" is used colloquially. Although yes I guess jarjarjedi could've been more precise in his speech I don't think it's far off from the truth.
I consider myself a dissident rightist harboring no illusions about this entire matter but I do sort of wonder – is there any school of thought that is not of the third/fourth wave lipstick feminist / liberal / ‘progressive’ variety that these posters would ever be willing to not categorize as horrible, hateful, radicalizing (whatever that word even means in their minds) and demonic?
Islam when considered as a distant belief system of oppressed people
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Interesting. I don't doubt you but I don't use blue sky. My reddit feed is not filled with anything I'd call celebrating. Many sarcastic "thoughts and prayers", and many pointing out supposed ironies about his stance on gun control, lots of " this is a bad for the country".
I don’t use Reddit, but I’ve been checking /r/politics periodically over the past 24 hours to see the reaction there. The reaction from the mods has been to delete every post about his death. Most of the comments I saw before the posts were deleted were either celebratory or smugly satisfied.
More options
Context Copy link
I don't either, which is why I took a few minutes to check, and I'm sure if I dig deep enough I can find more people on bluesky who at least has the ability to acknowledge this is not something to be celebrated. I think this just means your feed consists of Subreddits with higher quality users, which I would not be surprised for someone who has come to the motte.
Yeah I clicked over to the "popular" feed on reddit, but, same thing? Maybe I am in a weird filter bubble
I have heard that reddit admins were rapidly purging anything celebrating his death from the site. There were apparently entire popular posts from /r/politics that were removed.
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
Bluesky is, as we speak, dogpiling Gavin Newsom for saying political assassinations are bad. Yes it is an exaggeration to suggest that literally every single bskyist is like that, but it definitely seems like a prevailing sentiment to me. "All [place] is alight" is less of a declaration of universal characterization across all individuals, and more a general description of the room.
It is very strange how I must be on the backfoot arguing that radical violence-enjoyer leftists exist, year after year, when they completely color every corner of the internet that isn't a total right wing bubble. Especially today, when I can engage with literally any left-leaning website on its own terms and see tons of justifications of this attack, and a sickening glee for it. I am sure emotions run high now even for me, but does this tell you nothing? Do you think these people do not exist?
I agree that there are a lot of opportunistic right wing extremists using this as an excuse to appeal to normies, by the way. These accounts were only looking for a pretense to violence pill conservanormies. Sure. But their job is extremely easy when you can do what I did and immediately find tons of people cheering the attack. This is not a fringe element you have to go out of your way to find, you will instead be shouted at for not embracing violence enthusiastically enough all across the usual sites. Are you not seeing it? The temperature is not lowered by the fact that these right-wingers are, by a simple glance at the state of lefty internet spaces, apparently factually correct in their assessment that the prevailing leftist voice wants their audience dead.
I was in the same position as Doubletree or 4bpp yesterday, reflexively ascribing this to a few left extremists nutpicked by the algorithm. But "he got what was coming to him, I have no empathy" really does seem to be the prevailing vibe on Reddit at least.
I've done well enough insulating myself from leftist online spaces after we left Reddit, I had somehow forgotten what it's like.
The News mods were doing their damndest to trim that while still allowing discussion, though - I recall them putting a temporary lock on the thread so thay could catch up with all the reports.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'm not saying these people don't exist. I'm saying two things:
The conservative fascination with politic violence goes far deeper than just a few "right wing extremist" accounts. This is just what the whole 2A/tree of liberty stuff is about. I
we are in this (bad) place because of a runaway tribal culture war dynamic. Highly emotive statements that are not measured or specific in their claims oftenmake this problem worse, not better, and so anyone who wants the temperature to decrease should be careful about how they frame their posts.
I have personally observed many sickening statements concerning, for example, Kilmar Garcia, coming from conservatives. what would your point be exactly?
I will just be upfront and tell you that my concern is because the reasons people list that make Charlie Kirk murderable are reasons that could easily justify killing me all the same. This from a great deal of people I know. Charlie Kirk's rap sheet is seldom even about any tangible Harms, but just having bad takes. That is why people are celebrating. This isn't equivalent to wishing ill will on someone who was factually an illegal immigrant. In a moral human nature sense these can be equivocated I suppose, and I don't actually think him spending the rest of his life in a Venezuelan torture hole is a just outcome, but I do not think that is a fair comparison to my neighbors implicitly expressing that they would want my arteries perforated if they knew better.
I understand where you're coming from. Though realistically these people celebrating, it's all performative, for all except 1e-6% of them.
theres a difference, but it's not huge. It's a crime to be here illegally but not such a crime that they deserve to be shipped off to a supermax prison, probably sodomized, etc.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
No it is not. 2A is not for shooting people who try to debate us. 2A is for shooting people that try to shoot us. Or apply other form of explicit, organized and widespread violence. Kirk tried to talk to people, that's what he was shot for. It's the opposite of what 2A is about.
Yeah, sure, that's the motte. The Bailey is shooting effigies of democratic politicians, brandishing firearms at unarmed leftist protesters, and posting up open carry at polling places.
Conservatives are more than happy to use firearms as a political intimidating tactic.
"Unarmed leftist protesters" are prone to physically attacking people, just ask Andy Ngo. And "unarmed" is such a weasel word - if somebody bashes you skull in with a brick, was he "unarmed"? What about metal bike lock? Skateboard? Plain old glass bottle? Or the same filled with petrol and set on fire? Given how easy it is to conceal a knife, is there even a way to know somebody is "unarmed"? Especially when you facing a mob dressed in a way that is specifically designed to make them intimidating? In some situations, where people are clearly behaving aggressively, it's only prudent to assume they may escalate - and take measures to deter then from doing that.
And have you heard about the group named NFAC? Using the initials only to make it SFW. To be clear, I support the right of these guys to own arms as much as any other person, but what they are doing with their legally owned arms is nothing but intimidation. And Black Panthers are know for posting uniformed big guys "unarmed" with clubs at polling places - just to make coming there more fun and welcoming, I am sure. So when discussing intimidation, let's remember that.
But the most important thing is this: if those conservatives would want to intimidate you, they'd say "stay away from me, or else". What the left is saying is different - "shut up and cease to spread your message, or else". And "or else", in this case, is clearly demonstrated as being murder. And the lower ranks of the left explicitly and enthusiastically endorse it. They don't say "how horrible it is that it come to that", they say "what a joyous day, let's murder Musk and Trump next!".
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I don't think this is quite right. The role of the 2A in both historic and contemporary normiecon consciousness is to provide for the capability of organized (i.e., militia) resistance, not terrorist attacks and political assassinations.
More options
Context Copy link
Conservatives generally have a better understanding of the ramifications of violence, instead of the weird channeled Left tendency where 95% of groups are totally off-limits for wishing so much as a stubbed toe upon them and then absolute outlandish threats of violence on whatever the preferred boogeyman. Racism and Transphobia being held as the absolute worst things in the world (since they're approved targets), or the outpourings of deathwishes upon non-vaxxers
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
More options
Context Copy link