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 -
Not "frictionlessly," but at least with respect to particular, rich, hard-to-legally-immigrate-to countries like the united states much less friction-full than currently. Of course, the overall makeup of immigrants would change, in ways I think both of us would find positive-- more hardworking mexicans, fewer lazy venezuelans*, for example. But I predict more immigration than we have now.
I guess we're using these words in different ways, here. I would agree that not all governments are states, but would say that any organized monopoly on violence is at least state-like, becoming more stateful the more organized and monopolistic it is. In particular, you imagined your mutual aid group being denied because of state-enforced ethnic heterogenity. But having community-enforced ethnic homogenity just transfers the "stateness", rather than destroying it. Being maximally charitable, you're imaging a case where the mutual-aid ethnic community doesn't exclude outsiders, but merely declines to offer them aid-- and yet, the very enforcement of the property rights required to keep that mutual aid mutual instead of being expropriated has what I would call the essential character of a state.
That is, I think, our essential disagreement here-- how we're using the words "state" and "government" and the lens through which we're analyzing the behavior and advantages/disadvantages of each. We also have some factual disagreements about e.g. immigration but I think they're noncentral to what we're spending a lot of ink discussing. Basically, you have a definition of these words such that the question,
..is non-tautological. But to a first degree of approximation, I believe any group of people taking care of you is more-or-less "The State" in the first place. To greater or lesser degrees, obviously... It's useful to analyze the ways in which a religious community, school, or job become state-ish to enforce their delegated monopolies on particular varieties of violence, but I wouldn't confuse them with getting put in jail for failing to pay taxes or losing fingers for failing to pay protection money. I would, however, confuse a city or (american federal) state that is an "anti-sanctuary" for the State if they prevented anti-anti-sanctuaries within their borders. Therefore, taken on its face, an argument for always devolving power from the state generalizes recursively to any sub-sub-sub-(etc)-community. I don't think that's the argument you're actually making, and I don't want to argue against a strawman. At the same time, I think the strong form of the anti-state vibe you're suggesting is wrong but can't pick out exactly what qualities/levels of a government/state you're criticizing so I can argue against them.
That would be based, actually, depending on what exactly, "by law" means. If it means we prevent non-catholics from joining, it would be cringe. But if it meant mandatory indoctrination I would be very happy. Aside from the economic benefits, I'm pro-immigration not despite, but because I think some cultures are better than others. It's the god-given duty of enlightened peoples to convert the backwards and spiritually destitute. For that reason, I don't flinch from the ideological necessity of imposing and enforcing a state. Consequently, I blame the people that compose the State for having values that are bad-- but don't blame them for imposing those values to the best of their ability to do so.
More options
Context Copy link