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 -
LOL, this period didn't exist. The Reagan era was also the era of latchkey kids (so called because they came home from school and let themselves in, because both parents were working). Politically, Reagan was hated by the good people of the media almost as much as Trump is.
(BTW, if you mean the former Harvard-associated women's college, it's Radcliffe. Ratcliffe is the CIA director and doesn't give degrees, at least not degrees you're allowed to talk about)
But while French is all the c-words anyone ever called him, the reaction French has is shared across wide swathes of the political spectrum. If you suggest a problem might be caused by women, or something about women, or that the solution may involve restricting women in some way or even allowing them less power over men, it's just automatically rejected. Problems where something like that is the actual solution simply cannot be solved because of this.
We're already at a point though where Boomers and GenX-ers are understandably nostalgic for the age of latchkey kids, because kids at least went outside together and were physically active instead of being phone addicts rotting their own brains in isolation.
More options
Context Copy link
Thanks. Fixed.
Exactly! But there is a weird BoomerCon rose-colored-glasses rembrance of the 1980s nonetheless.
I mean, compared to the 1970s, the post-1982 period was pretty damned good. Not just economically, but no major wars either. But a tradcon paradise it was not.
The eighties were the last period when tradcons believed that our ways could take over society again in the near future. We happened to be wrong, but that's why we look back on it nostalgically.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Based on the boomercon rose-tinted remembrance of the 80s and the boomerlib ability to trace every modern ill to something Reagan did (military spending and mental health funding for the two most common, but for a way out of left field example, my boomer father recently complained that all these airport troubles really started with Reagan breaking the Air Traffic Controller Union), there is apparently a point in one's mid-30s-to-mid-40s where the mind decides that's where all modern good/bad things stem from. For the boomers, all modern domestic issues can be traced to Reagan (international diplomacy is still Hitler-centered). It's going to be fascinating to see where millennials end up fixated when they reach their 70s. Will it be Obama or Trump?
Either Thatcher or Blair, depending on political affiliation.
More options
Context Copy link
Maybe both will fade and the true Millennial antichrist will be Bush II; 9/11 and the GFC both happened on his watch, after all.
People really do underestimate the GFC right now. I think in a just world it will be remembered much more prominently 60 years from now than it is today. Will this happen, I don't know, but it really is staggering to me the sheer number of people who graduated in that era and just...never found a real job and have been in a nearly 20 year state (at this point) of constantly applying for jobs they are technically qualified for and being rejected, while desperately clinging to whatever low paid sales/admin/service job they can swing.
In my corner of the world (government work), I think it's because it didn't impact boomers and older Xers much. They didn't get raises for a few years and their home lost value for a while, but that's about it. They weren't looking for work or getting cut due to a federal sequester (that hit the most recent hires, not the guys who'd been around forever) or going way upside-down on an ARM because of an inflated market, etc. They kept getting paid, kept their houses, and kept working their way towards platinum pensions (which got reformed during the GFC to the detriment of new hires, but not towards people already in the system).
It's been close to a decade now, but I remember some higher-ups at work talking about some applicants and they were commenting negatively on all the employment gaps many had from 2007-2014ish. It literally did not occur to them how awful the legal job market was during those years and that even good candidates might have some gaps.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move."
More options
Context Copy link
Admittedly those certainly didn't help; the Bush administration was fairly disastrous.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Why not both? It seems boomerlibs do blame everything on Reagan, but boomercons like to blame Carter and/or "the hippies" similarly ("JFK started the closings of asylums, and the ACLU was for it"). Two screens and all that.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link