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 would like to spotlight this comment by @urquan in last week's thread because it touches upon something that I feel warrants it's own discussion seperate from all of the drama surrounding the death of Renee Good. Specifically this line here...
Over the years I have often heard cosmopolitan liberals express a sentiment to the effect "the United States has no culture". I used to find this deeply frustrating, and even as a teenager it seemed obvious to me that there were clear cultural distinctions between the East Coast and West Coast, North and South, never mind between the US and UK or the US and France. We have an entire host of uniquely American, myths, stories, heroes, sports, holidays, figures of speech, etc... How could anyone be so blind as to think that the United States has no culture? It was as I got older that I came to understand that what they really meant was something more like "the United States has no culture worthy of consideration". The more I think about it, the more I think it is this distinction that the modern culture war is really being fought over.
In the blue corner we have liberals and post-modernists who seem to view the idea of nationalism and a national identity as something distinct from one's political, racial, and sexual identity as either "fake and gay" or something to be deconstructed and dismantled. To the extent that the existence of a distinct American national identity is acknowledged, it is as something to feel embarrassed about and apologize for.
...and in the red corner we have this guy. Yes I am aware the commercial itself is for an electric car, but let's be real, its a Cadillac, and I think we all know who that character would have voted for in 2024.
This ties into the rest of @urquan's post and what I see as the core appeal of Trump. I think that a large part of the reason that Trump evinces such strong reactions, both positive and negative, is that he gives off this vibe of being quintessentially capital-A AMERICAN in a way that I don't think any US President really has since the Cold War.
I have been accused of "trolling" and "rage-baiting" by users here for quoting Teddy Roosevelt's "Hyphenated-American" speech, but its something I stand by, and that I feel bears repeating.
It is that sense of one's real heart-allegiance that I feel is sorely missing from much of the modern immigration debate.
I largely agree with your points, and think integration is important. But also, living in the Twin Cities and watching how ICE is harassing a lot of our Hmong neighbors (my wife’s native-born coworker’s native-born children were detained) underscores just how stupid and racist the kind of Trump supporters that would seek to move through the get-50-days-of-training-and-join-ICE-on-street-rips-in-Minnesota are.
The Hmong fought with us in Vietnam and there was some danger posed to them after our withdrawal. Many got refugee status, but did so decades ago. A bunch settled here in Minnesota. A few are still anamist, but most have converted to Christianity. They like hunting and fishing. The growth of the local Hmong middle class has resulted in more Minnesotans, unhyphenated, owning bass boats. We’re on the third and fourth generations born here in the States. The previous generation owned pho and bahn mi restaurants. The current attend the U of M and have middle class corporate jobs.
There is no significant ongoing illegal immigration issue related to our Hmong community. But the ICE agents being bussed in to our metro from red tribe America genuinely have zero conception of any of this. If they’re at all representative of MAGA, I promise you they also believe in hyphenated Americans.
Which is the inherent risk when [your local political body, henceforth referred to as "you"] decide you either won't follow the existing law, or are unable or unwilling to spend the political capital to change it to something your community can accept.
This isn't a hard concept to understand[1], and all Imperial (or Federal, which is just Imperialism within a border) systems do this, for this exact reason- because they won't care about your local community standards and the nuances therein. The Soviets didn't use Hungarian or Czech soldiers to put down the uprisings in those countries; they chose people not from those areas specifically because painting the people in those areas of the Soviet Empire as a simple adversary is more effective that way.
It is not, and should not, be the Hmong's problem that they [and their representatives and other power-brokers in their local community] has decided to put themselves in opposition to these policies- and the fact they in particular are being burdened at outsized rates simply for looking more like the stereotype of the average trafficked human is most regrettable (and indeed, SE Asia really isn't where the human traffickers were canvassing for subjects anyway- but their skin color is somewhat comparable, which is what matters).
But much like the abortion question before this, you have systems for finalizing durable consensus, and I suggest you use them. "Deciding not to spare the power to do these things because we can just ram it through the branches of government that don't work on consensus" is what has caused your system to flip-flop so destructively in the first place.
Remember that whole "those who make peaceful revolution impossible make a violent one inevitable" thing? Media is soapbox, legislature is ballot box, executive/judicial is jury box, and direct paramilitary/military action is ammo box. And I believe you're solidly in "jury" now.
[1] Unless your socioeconomic standing requires you not understand it, which is the impulse that drives war more generally. Power exists, and is desirable, because fairness is fundamentally undecidable.
More options
Context Copy link
So, your coworker. She was born in the US, right? But not her parents. So counting her, and her parents, she's 1/3 people born here? And then adding her grandparents she's 1/7? And great-grandparents she's 1/15? Presumably she is not included in the "ourselves and our posterity" that opens our constitution, since all of her ancestors were on the other side of the world, speaking foreign languages in a godless jungle at the time. In what world is that person, in any way, an American? That's a man born in a barn, not a horse.
What about her children? Did she intermarry with an American, or did she marry another foreigner in order to have foreign children? As if I even have to ask. Those kids, assuming they're 3/3 through parents, they're still 3/7 in grandparents and 3/15 with great-grandparents?
I don't care how polite and law-abiding they are. I've got my own model Asian minorities (they're always Asian, almost like biology dictates impulse control) in my neighborhoods. They're still foreign, they still change the character of the nation, and they should still only be allowed in small number and not allowed to form ethnic enclaves. They certainly should not be used as a shield for the abominable minorities (africans, muslims, and african muslims, I can't believe we let them in, my grandchildren will be cleaning up this mess), or as some example to be followed rather than an aberration that worked out.
Fifteen years ago the argument was legal vs illegal immigration. Now it's American vs Foreigner, and the paper citizenship of the foreigners don't carry any weight. I do not care where these people were born. They are not American, they are not native, and they do not belong here. If they are gracious guests, they may be allowed to stay, but they are guests and may be removed.
This world. 14th Amendment, baby. You don’t get to pick one line from the Constitution and ignore the rest. Citizenship is more than a paper guest pass.
You can’t help but equivocate between counting ancestors and “character of the nation” bullshit. I think you’re just parroting any excuse you can find. There is no coherent threshold that keeps the people you like in America while driving out the nasty foreigners.
Maybe you’re far enough up your own ass to have your own Ariernachweis going back to 1788. Which of the 28,000 voters was your meal ticket? Who secured the blessing of liberty for you?
American culture is awesome. I don’t think you deserve it.
Why not? Everyone else does, and whatever objections you and I might muster have clearly failed.
To be clear, I do not endorse the assessment described above. I do not believe that "American" is a boundary that can be effectively drawn on racial or ethnic lines. Unfortunately, that agreement is downstream from my assessment that "American" is not a boundary that can be effectively drawn at all.
More options
Context Copy link
Care to take a stab at defining it?
Sure. I wasn’t fully satisfied with my ramblings during the user viewpoint post, anyway.
Tl;dr The American ethos is classical-liberal individualism by way of the marketplace of ideas. Everyone has certain rights, and if you play along with America’s rules, we’ll enforce them for you. And you should want to play along.
Points 1-2 incentivize cooperation over defection. Point 3 hedges against some of the worst outcomes for subcultures, again incentivizing cooperation. Point 4 is just business, and Point 5 keeps the whole thing running.
Adopting point 2 is probably the hardest part, and it’s one that plenty of other states have fumbled. We really had to believe that there were other people deserving of those rights. Even then, we almost lost it all due to the economic incentives of denying those rights to some people.
I’m willing to believe that our start was only possible due to the combination of British law, Protestant religion, and our particular economic situation. But once the engine was going, we were able to stabilize and adapt when other cultures were collapsing. We handled the development of nationalism better than basically all of Europe. We won the Cold War right as we reassured ourselves of point 5. Our culture works, and I expect it will continue to work.
More options
Context Copy link
I'm not him, and culture is of course very slippery to define. But I'd like to try. (I'm also American, but I've lived abroad enough to see clear differences)
Language: Most of us speak English, but with a sizable minority who speak Spanish. There are isolated areas where people speak other languages, but there's usually strong pressure for the kids there to learn English, and most of us never make much effort to learn a second language other than English.
Geography: the US is a very large country, with people spread out all over it, and our cities are also fairly low density. This leads to a lot of detached single-family homes, car ownership, and driving. I'd say it also contributes to a culture that's fairly closed off, with most people only sharing their real feelings and thoughts with the people physically in their home.
Religion: Used to be overwhelmingly Christian, but that's changing rapidly. Still lots of cultural traditions inherited from Christianity though, like the Christmas holiday season and most businesses closed on Sundays. Most people are fairly accepting of others' religious beliefs, as long as it doesn't require us to actually do anything.
Fashion: Very casual. Most people wear something like jeans and t-shirts, or sportswear, almost everywhere. Exception: politicians, lawyers, and fancy offices still wear the traditional suit-and-tie. It's rare for people to dress in formalwear or any sort of traditional ethnic clothes. People also speak in a casual manner to almost everyone.
Food: Large portions of meat, cheese, salt, and sugar, with fairly simple presentations. Lots of soda and coffee, moderate alcohol. Smoking is increasingly rare. Not a lot of vegetables, and they're most often served raw in a side salad. Tap water is safe to drink, although many people buy a filter or bottled water anyway. Most people have a kitchen with a large oven that can bake pretty large sizes, so it's easy to prepare, say, an entire turkey at Thanksgiving. Not common to eat routinely eat street food or at communial dining places. Drive through fast food very common though. Obesity is quite common.
Politics: People tend to be pretty blunt and outspoken, and are happy to tell you their thoughts on whatever is in the news lately without much filter. They have a strong sense of "law and order", and are shocked when people don't follow the law. But also a lot of cynicism about governmeng in general, especially Congress, so they don't expect to be able to have much personal interaction with government. Liberals often like to do public protests, but this is mostly performative, not a serious attempt to topple the government.
Economy: Highly capitalistic culture. People trust the currency, and don't worry too much about things like counterfeiting or fraud in their normal life. "High inflation" means like 5%. There's a lot of talk about things like side hustles, startups, and the stock market. Almost everything is bought through market transactions. It's considered quite unusual for someone to go hitchhiking, couchsurfing, home farming, homemade clothes, etc- much easier to just get a job and then pay for all that stuff with money. People expect that infrastucture like water, power, sewage, etc will generally work but occasionally have issues.
Recreation: Traditionally centered around watching TV at home, now more often digital. Children do a lot of sports and hobby clubs, but those are increasingly rare for adults. Lots of time spent watching and talking about the "big 3" sports of American football, basketball, and baseball, plus smaller amounts for other sports, but not many people do them in real life. Media shows a lot of violence, some swearing, but sexuality makes people uncomfortable. Lots of self-deprecating humor about the faults of America.
What do you think of this list? Obviously a lot of generalities and exceptions here, but I think it works pretty well overall.
Ha. We went in completely different directions with our answers, but yeah, I’d endorse this one.
More options
Context Copy link
Was about to get a little chuffy on this one, being in the South and the "bless your heart" cliche coming to mind, before I caught it was under politics. And that point I was thinking of is under your 'Geography,' good catch on the closed-off-ness.
Yeah, I think this is a great broad-strokes; really, a lot more detail than I expected anyone to reply with! Thank you kindly.
More options
Context Copy link
I think this is a pretty good effort at defining "American culture", and do not believe that I could do better.
Suppose you are confronted by an angry and possibly violent mob of Americans. Which of these features you have listed would you appeal to in attempting to talk them down and convincing them to disperse? That is to say, which of these features provide serious, reliable traction on an interpersonal level?
Talking down angry mobs is something notable leaders have needed to do many times throughout history, and generally "culture" is what has allowed them to do it. Do you believe you are describing that sort of culture above?
Most of the time we just do nothing. Let them rant, they'll eventually get tired and go home. Trying to "talk them down" usualy just makes them madder, and if they're angry enough to do violence then it's kinda too late for talking. If it's a big mob then the police will show up, and maybe start arresting people if it really gets out of hand. But I think we've seen this week how that can easily go wrong.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Aren't you a mod?
Leave the backseat moderation to heritage mottizens.
Amusingly, @LykovFamilyBand joined the Motte the same month you did. (S)he just has 4 comments to your 4700.
I'm not sure it really fit, but I couldn't resist the joke.
Of course. I was just amused by the massive discrepancy in posting - I originally assumed it was a new account.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I mean, can you even be considered true aristocracy if you weren't around in the /r/SlateStarCodex culture war thread days?
Depends on the family. Does his wife's father have any AAQCs? What about his paternal cousins?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
The list of moderators
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
If there are no specific thresholds or expectations attached, then it may not be a paper guest pass, but it's certainly just a paper something. A renewable subscription? A season ticket? A no-show job?
Frankly it's incoherent for you to do all this harrumphing about how precious and sacred citizenship is, and how gauche and un-American it is to question the quality of someone else's citizenship, if you're going to then claim that it's perfectly fine and acceptable for someone to be culturally and socially alien while still retaining all the powers and privileges of American citizenship. If it's such a flimsy, ephemeral concept, no deeper than some words from a piece of paper somebody scribbled on a long time ago, why shouldn't it be subject to re-negotiation, attack, and even abnegation?
I did not make those claims. I don’t support illegal immigration, amnesty, opening the borders, any of that. Nor do I deny the expectations and responsibilities of citizenship. Immigrants should arrive and naturalize legally, then assimilate.
I rejected the claim that only “ourselves and our posterity” count as Americans, and I despise the idea that even “polite and law-abiding” “model” minorities are “an aberration which should be worked out.” It is gauche and unAmerican to cast legitimate, legal citizens as “guests”. Note that KMC did not argue that citizens who are socially alien were not Americans, but that minorities were inherently “not American, not native, and don’t belong here.”
Any serious definition of American citizenship must accommodate the 14th Amendment. Ignoring it in favor of one line from the preamble is chicanery.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
As leftists are so fond of saying, the Constitution is not a suicide pact
More options
Context Copy link
The paper citizens are the problem. Reminding me they are citizens does not make them any more American, it just highlights the problem.
You have devalued US citizenship rather than transmogrifying foreigners into Americans.
You haven’t articulated at all why exactly where somebody’s grandparents grew up or what language they spoke has any connection whatsoever to how “American” that person is. In which chromosome is it recorded whether or not somebody’s great great grandfather was American?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
'Culture is downstream of genetic personality traits' is the missing element that ties these together. Not stupid stuff like eating rice vs. potatoes, but 'in-group vs out-group preference', 'openness to experience', 'sensitivity to impurity', 'tendency towards religious experiences', 'collectivism vs. contrarianism' etc.
I think this cuts both ways though. Cultural preferences will drive genetic personality traits.
It's a feedback loop, which if anything makes the effect more powerful. I think absent heavy coercion you will struggle to change it for immigrant populations, but the more important point is that even if you do, you are still dumping masses of new genes into the pool. The overall character of the pool will be changed no matter what you do.
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
I have a couple of problems with this claim.
The first is that there are a lot of people out there who will say literally anything (including lying) in order to make the Trump administration look bad. Presumably that includes concern-trolling -- "I mainly agree with you, I just have some concerns . . . "
Are you willing to give the names of these detainees and link to some news articles so people can scrutinize your claims? Do you even have firsthand knowledge or are you going by what your wife said that her co-worker said that her children said?
Over the past 10 years or so, almost every negative piece of information I have heard about Trump turned out, upon scrutiny, to fall somewhere between wild exaggeration and outright fabrication.
The other issue is that the process of enforcing any law necessarily entails some degree of false positives. Assuming for the sake of argument that once in a while ICE briefly detains a citizen or permanent resident and then releases them doesn't really mean much unless it becomes a big problem.
More options
Context Copy link
What were your "wife’s native-born coworker’s native-born children" doing when they were detained? Because in most of the cases I have seen where a US citizen is detained it's because they try to interfere with the arrest of someone else. Statistically only like .5% of people ICE detained this year were US Citizens, so it's not impossible that a mistake was made. But the framing that ICE is just arresting brown people and sorting them out later doesn't seem to hold up to data.
Went to Home Depot for some drywall. Have you even seen any Hmong involved in the protests, here? These aren’t postmodern woke progressives. Both of my wife’s kids coworkers were released the next morning. But still, it’s all exceedingly un-intelligent.
No, Hmong tend to be salt-of-the-earth people. But kids, especially college-aged kids, can get swept up in things even when they know better.
From what I can tell, their experience is not representative of ICE's activities. I am sorry they had a rough experience. I would like experiences like that minimized, but there are a certain number of false positives that will happen when enforcing any law and I would rather have those false positives than no law enforcement. I would say the same if it was myself caught in a sweep.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Are the Laotians here the Hmong you refer to?
No. They’re not. At All.
The Hmong have clan-based surnames. If the surname isn’t Vang, Yang, Xiong, Her, Thao, Lee, Moua, Lor, Hang, Khang, Kue, Vue, Fang, Chue, Cheng, Cha, Kong, and Pha, then you can pretty quickly rule out with almost total accuracy they’re not Hmong.
That perp’s name is Sriudorn Phaivan.
The first perp is Phaivan, but there's a Vang, a Vue, a Yang, a Xiong, and a Lor also. So possibly 5 Hmong and one non-Hmong Laotian. I suppose Yang and Xiong are common non-Hmong surnames as well, though.
So there’s five guys, but not the really nasty one, and we’ve got 3,000 ICE agents with more on the way and they’re shaking down Hmong citizens born here whose parents were born here who have never even been to Asia, for just being Hmong, for the reason they already knew about a specific half-dozen people they intended to rightfully arrest and deport and could have do so with just a few agents? A better test would be, “Are your street rips actually uncovering any previously-unknown illegal Hmong immigrants?” Given what’s being fed to the right wing press contains none of that: no.
It’s good they’re going after known offenders. It’s bad they’re harassing people because they’re Hmong. Which in my addressing OP’s point, it is not just the left that insists upon hyphenated Americans.
Five guys that we know about. Five guys that we caught.'
You can't help yourself. They aren't Americans, nobody is pretending they're Americans, because it's obvious they're Hmong, which is mutually exclusive with American. You can't even call them American Citizens, you call them Hmong Citizens like there's some Hmong nation that they are citizens of.
Any man who says he in an American but something else besides is no American at all. That goes double for the Hmong who are well integrated and mostly assimilated. If you're something else besides, you are foreign, and will always be foreign, and you will always carry with you that dual loyalty which precludes assimilation.
Not American. Never will be American. Never can be American.
Hmong. Different. Guests, at best, but native? Never.
More options
Context Copy link
Vang: Sexual Assault, sodomy of a child under age 13, and procuring a child for prostitution
Vue: Strong-arm rape of a 12-year-old and kidnapping with intent to sexually assault
Yang: Strong-arm rape, aggravated assault with a weapon, and strangulation
Xiong: Rape and child fondling
Lor: Rape, rape with a weapon, and sexual assault
Oh, and another Lor: Two counts of homicide.
All of these seem quite nasty enough. ICE seems to be going after them because they had deportation orders against them, not because they're Hmong (they also went after Phaivan and some Mexicans and Somalis and others)
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
More options
Context Copy link