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 -
Has the shot already been fired?
There seems to be an uptick in worst case scenario chatter, people imagining scenarios spiraling out of control until political violence increases up to the level of civil war.
Ignore whether any of these are likely. Assume a world where the US does descend into some sort of organized violence, the low end somewhere along the lines of the Balkans and the high end a slug-out like the Civil War.
When historians (and just assume historians exist, even if they're AI) look back will they identify something that's already happened as one of the primary inciting incidents? I don't think we've had a Fort Sumter but is John Brown's body already marching?
Alternatively - and again only under the pure assumption that it happens, no implication meant as to the probability - if you think it hasn't happened yet, roughly how long until it does?
Hasn't been fired yet, but there's some obvious places where it might -- conflict between state law enforcement and Federal around immigration is one. Imagine the Portland judge's decision that Trump can't use the National Guard the way he wants stands. Antifa gets cocky and turns Portland into a riot zone again. Local law enforcement appears but essentially protects the rioters. Trump invokes the Insurrection Act (in the middle of the night of course) and sends in some National Guard unit arguably (but not definitely) in defiance of the judge's orders. Portland and Oregon declare this illegal and the staties try to stop them... there's your shot.
Alternatively, the decision DOESN'T stand. Trump uses the National Guard in more and more blue cities. Local law enforcement gets in a conflict with them, shots fired.
Police, despite being dressed in blue, are overwhelmingly red. I find it hard to believe that a significant amount of local or staties would be willing to shoot feds even if given orders to that effect.
The big difference from the actual Civil War to me is a seeming lack of enthusiasm for fighting under a state flag. Despite a recent surge in state vexillology interest --- I like Utah's new flag --- I think governors aren't going to be able to command legions, leaving a pretty big gap for who would command anti-federal forces.
The only way I can even hypothetically see the states winning is if disagreement within federal forces causes them to not show up. I think that'd happen if they were ordered to drop bombs today, but I think that's beyond the pale for even the current administration.
I mean Greg Abbott successfully raised an army and forced the feds to back down within the last few years.
Maybe that was the moment in some worlds.
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