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 -
“ Revolutions are intoxicating, I can see how you'd be swept up into the love bombing for being on the right side of history.”
Isn’t the central American Revolutionary mythology basically false? No taxation without representation is basically bullshit? Everything I have seen indicates total attempted taxation was like 1-2% of colonial income which to modern me basically feels like zero. My gut says having the British Navy to protect trade lanes was probably worth that contribution. British subjects in Britain were paying something like 20%.
I think that would be something like being a US allied country today and equivalent to the 3% of gdp to the military within NATO.
I guess you can make an argument that it still needed to happen for the country to grow and achieve manifest destiny. I have forgotten a lot of history so perhaps there were pressing concerns but that’s a lot of blood to be spilled to not paying a small tax where you also got some military protection. It doesn’t feel like a war that could have passed any just war theory.
Maybe, but I think taxes were in general lower back then. Income tax for example didn't exist, and neither did sales tax (some goods were excise taxed), leaving land, poll, and other assorted local taxes. One may grumble at their taxes going to the local corrupt politician, but you can shame them or vote them out.
So I think that it was mostly a matter of principle for them. The Americans didn't view themselves as a British colony/territory, but citizens. When they were scorned by the king they probably saw themselves as fighting for a say in their own future.
Incidentally, if the Puerto Ricans made a similar argument with similar fervor, it might behoove the United States to give them a senator or let them go.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link