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 -
Revisiting Vivek Ramaswamy's Christmas Rant: One Year Later
The tome in question, in case you need to refresh your memory. One hundred and twenty five million views. This single tweet tore open a gash in the Republican coalition that has yet to heal (though I don't want to overstate the counterfactual impact here, this particular fault-line was inevitable).
Looking back, it is clear now that the controversy was never just racist shit-flinging. There is a real philosophical conflict underlying the backlash. It is perhaps most elegantly stated as a variant of the Euthyphro dilemma; is our culture good because it is American, or is it American because it is good? Vivek is a functionalist. If an aspect of American culture is non-functional, then it should be replaced. His opponents in the comments are overwhelmingly essentialists. Americanness is an ontological property that is good because of it's essential nature as American. In this context, the idea that someone might choose to discard prom queens or jock sports fandom is a threat to America itself. Of course, this begs the question, who counts as American? And we end up with the "Heritage American" discourse that has been popping up lately.
Vivek’s big issue is he’s lived a sheltered life. He’s never been with normies. 95% of the people in any country are just too dumb to win as strivers (Israel excluded). Promoting striving culture is just bad politics because 95% of the voters can’t win that game.
I don’t think striving culture makes countries rich. I think the best scientist just enjoy being scientists and are having fun. It’s not grinding for them. I think few professions benefit from striving culture. The only potential exception being medicine.
I don’t consider myself a striver. I did do math problems for fun growing up. I went to math tournaments. Why did I do it? I was having fun.
Vivek is the only Republican I would vote against. The vision for the party he has is a cancer and it’s worth giving Dems a little more power to destroy him.
It’s stupid to let Vivek run in Ohio because I highly doubt I’m the only one in the base who vote against him.
He's also just really scuzzy, even by the low standards of Ohio politicians. Musk can make these sort of arguments stick by pointing at one of several giant factories. Vivek can point to... failed biomedical stuff in an even-more-scammy-than-normal field, a politically-focused investment fund, and partial ownership of BuzzFeed.
None of it's clearly fraud, or illegal, or even likely to get the New York AG going after him, but I wouldn't be surprised if he loses more Red Tribe support than Jay Jones lost Blue Tribe support.
I just don’t see who in the Republican Party that Vivek appeals to. He seems to believe in blankslatism which is very unpopular in the high IQ parts of the GOP. He made fun of football and cheerleaders so I don’t think he’s cool with the blue collar guys. He’s not Christian. I will be completely honest that I don’t think someone can be American without conversion.
Who’s his voter base? Boomer neoliberals? I thought they all became Democrats already.
This anti - Vivek rhetoric is wild to me. He was one of the most eloquent avid culture warriors and had the skin color and balls to say what everyone was thinking more than Trump or DeSantis.
I am tired of presidents that play dumb or are dumb. I want 4-syllable words in speeches and the worship of merit. I want to crush pro-black racial spoil systems, salt the earth so they never return, and I'll take any ally anywhere to accomplish it.
I understand that many in the red tribe don't want these things but I would have voted for him, easily, even with the scuzzy businesses.
If you believe in hbd and are concerned about racial spoils systems then how could you do anything that might increase the number of Indians in America? The vast majority of Indias population is no more intelligent than American black (probably lower due to race mixing). A few Brahmins are fine but anything that risks potential immigrants of 100’s of millions of lower class Indians is a gigantic risks.
Infinity Indians isn't the argument I'm making, and I don't think Vivek ever made it either.
But that seems like what we will get. Heritage Americans don’t like being racists or mean. Indians will advocate for other Indians. Without limiting Indians today we end up with infinite Indians which eventually means the large amount of low IQ Indian populations.
I don't know the statistics about how Indians advocate for one another. I work in tech, so I see plenty of the ingroup preference there. I agree it's a risk, but I also don't think high-caste indians are interested in importing their lower-caste brethren.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Huh? Vivek went on a rant about American laziness wherein he listed a bunch of reasons why America would crush India in a war and somehow came to believe they were bad things.
Do you doubt in any way the pervasive culture of laziness in this country? His comment hit a nerve because deep down we know it's more true than not. It transcends racial lines. Talk to a millennial or Zoomer about hard work or striving. They're almost alien concepts.
I think American culture would be improved dramatically with 10% more striving: white included.
His rant isn't really about laziness though. Laziness is not what causes people to prioritize "prom queens" and "jocks". Indeed, the prom queen and the jock are examples of excellence in their own fields, that being maintaining physical beauty + good social status and athletic prowess. And what he further gets wrong is thinking these things are somehow anti-correlated with the things he would personally like to see popularize like "math olympiad champ" and "valedictorian", while in America they are not. Perhaps if he were more in tune with real American culture he wouldn't be buying into left wing movie tropes as indicative of real life. But here, in the real world, you can be prom queen and get a 1500 on your SAT and maintain a quality GPA (whatever that means in 2025 is not something I know, when I went to HS 4.0 was still considered exceptional, but grade inflation has probably changed that). In the real world you can win a science competition while making all conference or all state on the football team (or in my case winning a regional title in an individual sport).
Indeed, if we drill down into Vivek's screed, it is simply self serving ignorance. It was a bunch of jocks, who happened to also be brilliant, who ran the British Navy as it established an empire that easily subjugated Vivek's people, and Americans of the same ilk then won the world wars and beat back communism (which, again, Indians thought was really cool). But he attacks things he does not know, and/or cannot compete on (and in fact many other Indians tend to struggle in these realms as well). No mention of his sporting in his background, and we would expect from his rant he was not prom king. Indians as a whole struggle with athletics, having the lowest Olympic medals/capita of any large nation.
And is there a laziness problem? Yes, but it is not some problem with Prom Queens failing to cram in a dozen extra problem sets a day so they can get their SAT score from a 1400 to a 1450, and its not because some jock does a half ass job on some meaningless homework assignment given to him by an overeducated English teacher who couldn't get with the jock she liked when she was in HS. No, its the stoners and the antisocial kids that need to be reformed, but since Vivek buys into the Hollywood high school myths of dumb jock and repressed genius that gets shoved into lockers he doesn't have any real applicable solutions. Instead he has a dumb rant against the very great things about America that cause America to put every other country into the metaphorical locker.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Honestly, now this is all I can remember about Vivek's culture warring. Sad!
How do you feel about pro-import the world to compete with your children? Maybe no slots at our top research institutions should go to Americans who are American, but this will translate into a better America via culture. Then again, what if this were but a guise to continue importing the rest of the world to compete with your roofer's kids, too? Same old, same old.
I agree with a significant creedal or ideological element in the American spirit. I also don't believe I'm opposed to America, the nation and its people, improving in some way. I agree that America should try to brain drain places where or when appropriate. Yet many people before Vivek have said they want to brain drain the world of its genius and that being American is something more than blood, soil, or whatever fairy dust is in the air. Others have made defenses of certain visas or programs as important or valuable things for the nation. Had he made a limited defense of his preferred program he might been booed but forgotten. Instead, he said we Americans must change because of and motivated by a specific, topical visa discourse. Not the nationality that needs to change, but the culture-- for the race with China. Nobody bought it as, in my opinion, they shouldn't have. They still shouldn't.
Say what you will about black Americans, but at least they've spilled blood for the country. That's not something adequate software engineers are going to do even if we double our efforts or import them wholesale. Not even if they did improve the culture.
More options
Context Copy link
Vivek's problem is that his whole persona is designed to appeal to edge-lords on twitter, when edge-lords on twitter are a overwhelmingly Democratic Party constituency. Meanwhile the MAGA crowd having taken his statements at face value have concluded that he must be either a beltway grifter or a progressive Trojan Horse.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I think you’re hitting the core here.
If Vivek moved here, converted to Catholicism, named his kids Sean and Brad, starter personally going by Jim and became an obsessive football fan, maybe I’d buy it.
Because that’s basically what my ancestors did. They changed their names, punished their kids if they tried to speak the old language, named their kids almost comically American names, and just thanked god they were allowed to be here. They wanted to be American not lecture Americans on how to be better.
Four generations from now if some Vivek descendant wants to “rediscover their roots”, then fine. But America does have a culture, actually, and if you want to be an American the good news is they you can! You just have to actually do it.
Here is the actually comically American list of names
More options
Context Copy link
Shouldn't he be converting to, like, Episcopalianism or Presbyterianism or something? Catholicism is the religion of low-skill immigrants trying to replace the founding stock of America.
I think the internet has just been devastating for Protestantism. I don’t really think there are any “serious” Protestants left.
If Vivek “converted” to some pointless Evangelical mega church, it would just feel hollow and unserious.
Catholics (and I include the orthodox in this) have basically just won. Protestantism isn’t taken seriously anymore, and so a “conversion” to Protestantism would similarly not be taken seriously.
Hi there. I'm a serious Protestant.
It's worth bearing in mind that in the real world, as opposed to the internet, evangelicals are doing a much better job of holding on to faith than Catholics or Orthodox. News stories about youth conversions to Catholicism or Eastern Orthodoxy are usually looking at a few high-profile outliers rather than the overall demographic trend.
The Catholic Church in the United States, demographically, is buoyed up by large numbers of Hispanic Catholic immigrants, but if you restrict yourself to looking at people born in the US who were raised Catholic, they look very similar to mainline Protestants, i.e. in decline. They have noticeably lower retention than evangelicals. Church attendance is consistently higher among evangelicals than Catholics, as is consistency on moral or social issues. (Go through and compare if you like - 59% of Catholics are pro-choice, 70% support same-sex marriage!) If you compare what Protestants and what Catholics say about why they stay in their church, Protestants are significantly more likely to say that they believe in the religion's teachings and that it gives them spiritual comfort, while Catholics are more likely to say that it's because it's just the religion of their family or community. Note also that 1% of Americans are ex-Protestant Catholics, and 4% of Americans are ex-Catholic Protestants, which seems suggestive.
I'm not American, but I work in a religious field and I will say that just anecdotally I have run into a number of ex-Catholic evangelicals, and I would say that for every person raised a Protestant who felt that they were given a shallow spiritual education, and looked longingly at the riches of tradition and liturgy in the Catholic and Orthodox churches (and I count myself as one such person), I have met a person raised a Catholic who found that faith numbing and deadening, but who came alive on discovering evangelical Protestantism, which gave them the tools to cultivate a more passionate, heartfelt relationship with God.
I don't say this as a triumphant evangelical myself. I'm a mainliner, and I will forthrightly confess that the mainline churches are hollowed out, frequently heretical, and dying. I'm part of what I hope will be a small but devout rump of surviving mainline Protestants. My own institutions are largely betraying the faith and receiving in their own congregations the due penalty for their error.
But I would suggest that if you think that Protestantism in the broader sense isn't being taken seriously any more, or that Catholics have just won, or are in a healthier position overall, you may be in a bubble. Evangelical Protestants are probably the healthiest large church tradition in America.
What’s the point here? If Reddit claimed itself as a Christian church, there would be more Redditors than Catholics too. They could say that posting on Reddit is “attending church”, that being a Reddit moderator is being a “pastor”, claim each subreddit as a denomination even!
The point here is about how seriously a conversion by Vivek would be taken. Vivek attending a mega church every week would move the needle either 0 or negatively.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It's funny, this is a particularly Catholic argument, in that whenever I see a Catholic culture warrior online, they are usually saying basically this ("I mean, the culture wars are basically over, we won" - first saw it during the Clinton administration). Not sure if it's an aggressive and slightly delusional form of conviction or cope, but it's almost charming, for the vast majority of us, especially in the US, who really don't care much about the schism. It's almost like seeing a "papist!" epithet in the wild.
More options
Context Copy link
I don't know what you mean by "serious" Protestants. There are clearly plenty of Protestants who are serious about their beliefs. If you mean that Evangelicals are tacky and unintellectual, I won't argue, but I don't see why that would make it unserious (plus, I think the main difference between megachurch evangelicals being tacky and Roman Catholics having ornate gravitas is about 1500 years). I'm also unsure on the role of the internet in this - Evangelicals started on their current trajectory well before the internet. And, of course, Evangelicals are not all American Protestants.
I don't think it's true that Protestantism isn't taken seriously. Rather, Protestantism lacks the centralized hierarchy, unified style guide, and Ancient Traditions^tm of Catholicism and Orthodoxy, which puts it at a disadvantage with people who really like those things. The aesthetics/values/ideas of American Protestantism (especially capital-L Liberal Protestantism) are heavily conflated with general American aesthetics/values/ideas, and, much like American culture as a whole, lives in an eternal present. The power of Catholic identity is not that it is inextricably tied to America, but that it isn't.
What I mean is that Protestants are not intellectually serious, and that most of the claims keeping people in their church don’t stand up to basic scrutiny.
“The Church is hiding the Bible from you they don’t want you to read it only WE have the true words of God!” was a convincing argument when it wasn’t easy to find out that this is just very literally not true.
As far as conversation to Protestantism being unserious: not only could I become a Protestant tomorrow if I wanted to, I could become a Protestant pastor, and so could Vivek.
Vivek Could announce tomorrow that he is starting a church, could call it a “Christian” church, and go around trying to convince people in Ohio that he’s a very serious Christian of some kind.
But this would all take 5 minutes, and be meaningless.
If he wanted to become Catholic, there’s a process to it, he’d need to get his marriage convalidated, baptize his kids, etc. If he wanted to become a priest (to contrast this with the seriousness of becoming a Protestant pastor), it would take him around a decade of philosophy and theology classes, he’d need to leave his family, etc. (Although I'm not sure The Church would take
That’s the point I’m making. It Vivek went through OCIA, got confirmed, convalidated his marriage, went to mass at least weekly, and baptized his kids, I think people would see it as more likely to be genuine.
If he showed up at some mega church or revivalist thing a few times and bought a Bible, I think it would read as performative.
More options
Context Copy link
Just your daily reminder that in the US, the average Roman Catholic Sunday mass is tacky, and does not particularly follow unified style guides. That isn't even trad griping about things which aren't my preference like altar girls and the like; I am the Lord of the Dance Said He is a much more common hymn than anything like Faith of our Fathers, let alone the lovely classical music that inspired so many composers. Mass prayers may differ much less in verbiage, but when sung they are often set to cheesy folk music, or evangelical praise-and-worship light. Guitars are more common instruments than organs. Catholic churches vary strongly in architectural quality but the average Catholic goes to mass in an uninspired pseudo-amphitheatre decorated with designed-by-committee religious art that has nothing in common with the historical churches of Europe that nobody goes to, in a brutalist style if they're unlucky. The typical vestments look, literally, like burlap sacks. The 'ornate gravitas' that you speak of is uncommon enough in America to have special names for it(and is far less available than the other common strong liturgical preference- 'charismatic style' which apes evangelical worship services much more strongly. The majority of deeply religious Catholics in the USA imitate Evangelical outward forms). It's popular with Hollywood because it's easy to show on a screen looking and sounding cool. Most American Catholics have never heard Gregorian chant in a church service, see incense a couple of times a year, and dress worse for mass than protestants do.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Confessional protestantism and fundamentalist evangelical-adjacent protestantism are going strong, and they don't restrict the internet anymore than hardcore Catholics do. They're hard to track and more geographically constrained but they do exist.
Can you link me to an example of a church where, if Vivek Ramaswami converted to it, Americans would see this as a strong signal that he was all in on America?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The Mennonites don't count? I mean, Anabaptists are very much Protestant (a product of the "Radical Reformation"), and they seem rather "serious" about it to me.
Doesn't this prove my point pretty cleanly? The Mennonites are not using the internet.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The conservative true elite is increasingly Catholic, but evangelical megachurchianity is more common for the masses. Episcopalians and Presbyterians are… not common, and don’t go to church anyways.
Wasp churches have largely died out. Catholicism still has an intellectual class which makes Catholicism the closest thing to a national religion now. Evangelicals lack intellectual rigor and have outsourced that to Catholics. Mormons are honestly probably the number 2 Waspy Christianity today.
It does seem like we’ve already had one great replacement. True heritage Americans seem to have already died out.
I don't think this is actually true per se, but evangelical intellectuals who are known for being evangelical tend to be theologians. Evangelical intellectuals in other fields exist, but they often aren't known for their evangelicalism – and conversely, evangelical theologians often aren't known outside of evangelical communities or sub-communities. (I reckon it's very Protestant to double-down on theology, do a better job developing it than Catholics, and then mostly drop the ball in other areas because they're of "secondary importance" with the predictable consequences.)
For a variety of reasons I think Catholics are better at bridging the gap between mainstream culture and Catholic culture – one of the notable reasons being that "Catholic" isn't shorthand for "right wing" whereas "evangelical" is, which tends to make Catholic intellectuals more respectable. (However I also think it's true that the Catholics have built better mechanisms/pipelines for their intellectual elite. They deserve both kudos and study for that.)
More options
Context Copy link
Episcopalians are still going- shrinking congregations that skew much older than the average church, but they're not about to die out, there'll just be fewer of them. Methodists are still there, albeit older and slowly shrinking, PCA has managed to avoid full collapse even if it's got hard times for the forseeable future. ELCA(mainline lutherans)- famously not a waspy denomination- are the real mainliners who won't be around when their current congregants kick the bucket(which won't be that long).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
There were Catholics here from the start.
The efforts by modern Catholic nationalists to insert themselves into the founding ideology of the United States is a weird sort of stolen valor. They were always a small minority, even in the places that were meant to be tolerant of them like Maryland, and American Republicanism was strongly associated from the outset with Protestantism. One of the Intolerable Acts pertained to toleration of Catholics! And, of course, anti-Catholicism flared up again with large scale Catholic immigration in the mid-19th century.
(You can, of course, admit Catholics into the founding mythology, but then you have to admit basically everyone)
You can sneer at Maryland but you can't make it go away. Many have tried, none have succeeded.
Establishment of Catholicism, by giving the Midwest to Quebec.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yes that’s one thing I dislike about Vivek. That he seems culturally alien to America.
My second complaint is that at about a 70% probability I think his mental model of the world is incorrect. Striving only boost output in maybe medicine. I don’t think striving culture would boost American wealth.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The red tribe elite is probably more blank slate than the blue tribe, if anything. They unironically believe that black underperformance is due mostly to culture and that removing blacks from the ghetto culture(and forcing them to assimilate to a better one, namely theirs) is what is necessary to fix issues in their communities. They can respect the oriental grindset but think they should age out of it with assimilation. Twitter is not real life.
I think it depends on which groups of elites you talk about. The young congressional aides types I tend to think are big on Fuentes and hbd. The 80 year old congressman may still be blankslatist.
I think rent tribe elite people want to think like Romney but I think the blacks have bad culture people have died out. Intellectually the right needed to develop a thesis on disparate impact after woke and blacks are just dumb makes a lot more sense now.
The thesis on disparate impact is 'they're uncivilized, and they should be more like us'. That is what normie red tribe elites think. The ultrapolitical ones not so much, but they're a small fraction. The fuentards are far outnumbered by people who think blacks should go to church, study, and work harder and they'd achieve white outcomes.
Isn't Black church attendance already significantly higher than white church attendance?
The African American female church attendance rate is much higher than any other demographic sees; the male church attendance rate is not. ‘The men need to go to church more’ is a criticism of black culture that most black people themselves would agree with, and the usual red tribe elite formulation is that blacks should go to churches with stronger family values moralism anyways(the black church is not that).
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I don’t even know how you would calculate the normie belief. Even anonymous surveys don’t work because people still don’t like answering things that sound racists. The belief you think they have I would agree was there belief pre-2020 but now I have no way to measure it.
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
Getting the New York AG to go after him would be one of the better things for Vivek's popularity.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link