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 don't really have an opinion on his overarching theory, but I think he overstates the case against populism or I suppose fails to consider the case against elite intellectual consensus seriously enough. Take his subsection about crime. Sure there are studies that punishment doesn't deter crime that well. But, is punishment actually the purpose of the justice system, perhaps the populist thinks so. Perhaps they are intuiting longer prison sentences will deter crime, and are incorrect. But, if thats the case, the populist has gotten himself to the correct opinion (tough on crime) for the wrong reason, while the intellectual has tricked himself into a bad position (soft on crime), by not considering what actually matters, that being public safety.
Take, for example this case of the CTA arson attack that is taking the nation by storm. The facts are fairly straightforward, a man with 70+ prior arrests and 15 prior convictions, including a felony arson just 5 years ago, beat a social worker so badly her retina detached. Instead of granting a detention petition (itself a new creation because Illinois repealed cash bail in favor of an arcane, and time consuming first appearance court set of procedures), the judge released the Felon with an GPS bracelet. That was subsequently removed by another judge just a few months later, and then the previously convicted violent felon with a pending felony charge poured a liquid on a woman on the train and lit her on fire. This man doesn't need to be "punished by society" he needs to be "separated from society" preferably permanently. However, elite opinion on crime has made that result in the State of Illinois, basically impossible.
And we can repeat this problem over a vast array of other social policies where elite opinion differs greatly from populist opinion. You have the trans issue where elites convinced themselves that someone's subjective opinion about themself was more important than looking at their genes and junk. You have the Joe Biden decline where for years they convinced themselves a cancer riddled (as we now know) 80+ year old was just fine as POTUS because he made one semi-coherent angry rant.
And there are other issues I'd be less stridently anti-elite, but simply would point out that they misunderstand the populists because they focus on the slogans instead of what people are actually feeling. "They took er jobs" and "They are eating the dogs" are not factual assertions, they are distillations of vibes. Lots of people know guys who can't work construction anymore without speaking Spanish, immigrants do make housing less affordable simply by the numbers, trade has made winners and losers domestically and has caused us to have critical vulnerabilities to key industries in times of global instability, and they probably were eating the dogs (but also, like defrauding medicaid and every other welfare system we have)! Climate change is another one, perhaps elite consensus is right and its happening, and its man made, very few elites seem bothered by the question: Do we even care?
And in the end, thats why I think the article is wrongheaded. The failure of elites to come to the same conclusions as populists is not simply that the populist is thinking on a less abstract level, it is also that the elite has focused on a specific part of the question that satisfies them, but perhaps quite often isn't the relevant part of the question at all.
More options
Context Copy link