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 -
A lot of the discussions we have here hinge on public policy. The default assumption is that our institutions run in at least a quasi-rational fashion: that methods are tested, the results recorded, and lessons drawn to improve the systems involved. Obviously no system is perfect, and there will always be flaws, but the system will, even if haltlingly, progress toward greater efficiency. Almost every discussion of public policy, even here, takes this view as an axiom.
No part of the above assumption is accurate enough to base a meaningful discussion on. Our systems do not test theories, record results, or draw lessons. Malpractice leading to screaming disaster might perhaps be locally corrected, but the knowledge so painfully gained does not propagate, and it is routine to see the same ideas implemented a year or two later the next state over. No one, not the workers, not the management, not the politicians, not the academics or journalists and certianly not the voters, is actually both willing and capable to implement any sort of rational approach to any serious public policy question. Our systems drift in circles, guided not by hand and mind, but by the closed-loop human centipede of flattering falsehoods. And this is, amusingly enough, the optimistic state; were the fog of policy dementia to lift, people might demand solutions from a system congenitally incapable of providing them.
Never underestimate the extent that the popularity of an idea hinges on the ease of implementing it. Construction companies promote architects that like boring boxes and say they are superior to neoclassical buildings. School districts like experts that say that they don't need lots of special teachers and instead should include special needs kids in the regular class. If you want to become a star expert, find a way of justifying cutbacks and corner cutting by claiming that the cheap and fast method is superior.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link