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 have 2 hypotheticals:
I ask because Sanders appealed very strongly to many Trump voters, doing great in e.g. West Virginia but lacking e.g. black support (which the democratic primaries overfocus on. Besides Wasserman-Schultz et al.'s machinations.) His approach was not based on identity politics etc. I'm curious how people think his "movement" or time in office would have turned out.
A) He would have lost terribly, because Bernie Sanders is a terrible campaigner and his target demographic was too far left of the American center. B) If he did, woke would have been more brazen, but with less institutional support, causing its collapse to happen earlier.
If you run as a Dem, you need black support, which is why Mayo Pete despite being the darling of the Clintonites is a dead man walking concerning his political prospects. Blacks will not vote for a gay man. It's such a foreseeable outcome that the outrage coming in about two years time will be a amusing bit of drama to spectate from the peanut gallery.
I really don’t think Pete would do much better with black Dems if he was straight. Black Dems tend to like (like most people) charming, handsome men and Pete is neither. Obama and Clinton had more in common than either does with Pete.
Generally I would disagree. Older black Democrats in the south (the demographic you really need in a primary) tend to prefer friendly, kind of goofy white candidates to slick sharky ones. I think Biden’s reputation as a gaffe machine was actually an asset to him there. It’s one of the reasons I think Gavin Newsome will never win a fair democratic primary. On Pete specifically though I do agree, his only major resume item before being whisked away to Washington was a badly handled municipal police shooting.
More options
Context Copy link
Being gay also pushes him to the left, and black dems are the most moderate dems.
Fun fact- not particularly germane to the topic but still fun- Pete Buttigieg is E Michael Jones' nextdoor neighbour. I'm sure the national night out over there is fun.
More options
Context Copy link
That may be true, but being gay is absolutely a dealbreaker for African Americans. If Pete was built like Arnold Swartznegger and had the charm of Casanova he still wouldn't fly.
This is fundamentally a flaw in the Democrat coalition that prevents them from presenting a gay candidate for the presidential office, because the black lobby is so strong. Even if you whipped the reps into grudgingly do so, their constituents wouldn't vote for him, so what's the point?
This presents a refutation of the intersectional logic that is impossible to ignore.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link