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 -
Senate ends shutdown.
With no provision to extend COVID-era ACA subsidies, merely a vote, it has the appearance and character of a Democrat loss. The usual suspects on Reddit are crying foul of cowardice.
But could it have ended any other way? The Democrats are obliged to government unions, who weren't being paid: and to the urban poor, who weren't getting SNAP. Two massive interests within their base were being sacrificed for the benefit of... four million recipients? The math never added up.
You could say that the Republicans were heartless, but they have come out of it looking like fighters and winners, while the Democrats have capitulated to 'fascists'. The midterms will still probably be a Dem victory, but this act by Schumer and the moderates will not be something the #resistance will be likely to forget anytime soon.
It’s not just the urban poor who are on SNAP. The Democrats had a chance to make gibs into a real bread-and-butter issue, not just a culture-war distraction.
This was also a great opportunity to bait the Republicans into abolishing the filibuster, which would have helped Democrats in the long run. Zero Machiavellian instincts from these people. No wonder the base is angry.
It’s worth noting that a full Christmas SNAP crisis would be a major escalation. I realize some think the Dems should abandon “traditional politics”, but others think that the alienation and loss of trust that big of a move would cause could created some terrible effects. Like another Trump could rise, just as easily as the Dems could get a Trump of their own. A lot aren’t willing to risk that brave new world.
What is your mental model of this "full Chrismas SNAP crisis", because I think its probably a load of crap. At least with regards to actual people being hungry. I'd expect people would loot and steal and riot because they can't get their Dr. Pepper, but no actual amount of people would be starving. There are too many school lunches, shelters, food banks, etc. And even outside private charities, states can also always easily step up in this sort of situation by simply being less generous in their dispensations. Restrict the eligible product pool to vegetables, fruits, grains, beans, and dairy and you save like 90%, while avoiding the issue of people spending all their cash on day 1 on waygu steak or orange crush, or selling them for spending money.
Tell me how you really feel, Dan /s
No one has to die for it to be a crisis. You’re projecting. Lawmakers are unusually sensitive to grumpy people around Christmas. That’s all that’s required. People usually have semi-short memories when it comes to politics, but if Christmas and Thanksgiving are “ruined”? That sticks. Next year people will remember, and the vibe shift is potent. SNAP affects almost 1 in 8 people - you’re completely correct that blindly accepting that number is an overestimate, but stack it with the 1 in 14 people who fly during Christmas break, a shutdown past December 1st would cause another 1 in 7 adults to go without paychecks… these things stack up, and hit different segments of the population, not purely the poor. Many Americans if they miss a paycheck are OK, but discretionary spending IS sensitive to that stuff. Smaller Christmas gifts potentially (sudden back pay might even more than counterbalance this of course).
And that’s not even going into the vibes. People tend to view shutdowns as Congress not doing its job. That creates bitterness, since they can go “well I am working 50 hour weeks, and they are twiddling their thumbs playing blame games”, and that’s a bit of betrayal - a potent emotion that you have to be sensitive to. (Democrats aren’t immune from this either, of course, it’s possible constituents blame them, even if I think it’s not super likely to be a durable feeling)
I think it's a good example of just how non-typical the average Mottizen is that this isn't immediately obvious to everyone. Giving over 10% of the population a ruined Christmas in a way that can be plausibly blamed on a particular party is basically a political bullet to the brain, especially in a period where the election margins are pretty thin. I mean in the culture we have an entire century-old genre of story that is basically just "people being poor at Christmas/not being able to celebrate Christmas properly is bad and you have to make that not happen." Any government that fails at such a basic task has lost the mandate of heaven, and will be thoroughly destroyed.
People joke about people tolerating/enjoying Fascism for "making the trains run on time," and that's a pretty good example of ordinary day-to-day things that the general public cares more about than things like civil liberties. The Holidays is basically that times ten. People make a lot of promises leading up to the holidays, both implicit and explicit, and keeping those is a 'big deal' to most people. The party that causes family drama, marital strife, sad children, and economic harm right at the time where everyone is the most sensitive those things? They're done.
The only hope for this continuing shutdown would have been somehow successfully fully offloading the blame onto the opposing party, and that wasn't happening.
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