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 -
"lock her up" was a presidential candidate. I am not sure who is saying "lock them all up and be grateful we aren't having them all industrially executed" (the SJ left is generally not too fond of gas chambers, I think). If it is Newsom, I will grant you that it is worse.
I am sure that some politician somewhere is saying that a Democrat administration will be going over the conduct of Trump's ICE with a very fine toothed comb, and prosecute any agents who violated any departmental regulations which were on the books at the time.
I do not see this as particularly bad. Trump is running the DoJ as a weapon against his enemies, so turnabout would be fair. Sadly, I am also convinced that it won't be happening. Having federal agents who enforce your ideas with impunity is useful to any administration, and establishing a precedent of them getting persecuted by subsequent administrations would end this. This is also why we will not see a court martial over the bombing of shipwrecked sailors.
With the same creative and novel legal theories they used against Trump, I'm sure. Going to be amazing watching the gerontocratic Dems "discover" that enforcing laws they themselves wrote and passed decades ago is domestic terrorism or something.
The most prominent example I'm aware of is Hakeem Jeffries calling ICE a lawless organization engaged in state violence, and vaguely threatening to prosecute them in what very much looks like an attempt to intimidate federal agents.
I haven't seen anything that extreme from real '28 Democrat contenders, but let me ask you this. Remember the clip about giving free healthcare to illegal aliens, where every single Dem candidate raised their hand? Imagine the following question: "If you win the 2028 election, will you commit to prosecuting the fascist Trump administration and it's supporters to a level comparable to the Nuremburg trials?"
Which 2028 Dem candidates do you think would say "no"?
Which is exactly why I would expect the Dems to throw anything at the wall to force out, if not jail, every fed and ICE agents who supported Trump.
More options
Context Copy link
If turnabout is far, then what he's doing right now is fair, and any retaliation would just be a new aggression.
The way I see it, the Obama administration weaponized the DoJ to harm Trump. Biden (or whomever was calling the shots) certainly leaned on the DoJ to make sure that the J6 crowd was prosecuted harshly, without the leniency afforded to BLM rioters.
In his 2nd term, Trump doubled down on the politicization of the DoJ. Blanket pardons for all J6, withdrawing the security clearances of law firms who had offended him by representing his opponents (at least until they kissed his ring), starting an investigation into Good's wife (but not in the shooting), pardoning one Latin American president who was convicted of drug trafficking while at the same time kidnapping another one on likely much flimsier evidence of the same, pardoning people who bribed him by buying his shitcoin, etc pp.
I think that the politicization of the DoJ is bad no matter who is in charge, and I will grant you that the Dems started the circle, but clearly Trump drove it to new heights.
Are we just gonna skip over how Trump ended up with a mugshot being taken, and "muh 34 felonies"? If you're including pardons, why ignore Biden's signoff pardoning Faucci, his son, and a bunch of other people for anything they could have possibly been charged with, before any accusation was even made?
That's a reasonable position, but I don't know if you can derive "turnabout is fair play" from it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link