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 -
This is the mindset that I don't understand, but which clearly contributed to Good and Pretti turning up for a disaster.
This is going on about authoritarianism and so forth, but treating the Resistance Protests like, well, a holiday. "Did some light picketing in the morning, went for a pleasant meal and some skating in the afternoon". "Boycotted the Federal building from 9 to 12, then after lunch checked out original vinyl record stores".
God between us and all harm, but if this person gets hurt in any way, they and their spouse will be the first to be all shocked Pikachu face about "they used tear gas? real bullets???" Don't the baddies know they're not supposed to, in fact, do anything because this is our comfortable display of civic virtue and getting shot would really make it tough to grab that Middle Eastern buffet!
But that's exactly what it is.
When I was a teenager, my friends would often catch a train out to the nearest major city to go to protests. What were they protesting against? Fascism!
This is just Antifa doing Antifa things. Antifa isn't an organization? Sure! It's a mind-virus! A ridiculous meme! Made in Germany, please enjoy responsibly.
Teenagers are dumb and take stupid risks. This is normal. This, by the other hand, are grown-ass adults (their college friends are old enough to have an adult daughter).
Is "protest tourism" becoming a thing, like poverty tourism?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Schrodinger’s ICE agents.
ICE is composed of chubby manlet tacticool LARPers when you want to snicker and make fun of them to your team.
ICE is a deathsquad of roided out meatheads shooting to kill on behalf of a racist, fascist torture regime when you want to gas yourself and your team up as Stunning and Brave rebels, or when someone from your team finds out from fucking around.
More options
Context Copy link
I am also very confused by this. I don't know how to characterize this mindset without resorting to the word "unserious".
The starting premise for the protestors, as stated, seems to be that a swarm of evil, poorly trained stormtroopers are invading the city and snatching up and killing anyone they please. So why aren't they acting like it? Their behavior doesn't seem to follow from the premise. If they were getting into shootouts with the cops I would not be confused, because it would indicate to me they were taking the premise seriously.
Pretti got into a tangle with federal agents while armed. I don't think I can construct a coherent reason to carry while protesting that takes the premises seriously that doesn't involve an active intent to use it aggressively. Good seemed to be acting out of a misplaced sense of white liberal plot armor which is sort of understandable but still didn't take the "evil stormtroopers killing with impunity" premise seriously. Mark Russell and his wife went on vacation to a city they seem to think is under siege, and then proceed to treat the protest like a social function to kill time until the bowling alley opens.
Do they think this is for real or not? Did the constant crying wolf about Nazis for the last 10 years cause the reference to become so unmoored from the referent that they can't actually bring themselves to really mean it even while they're getting shot?
For some definition of "protesting", the Bundy standoffs might qualify as examples here (not endorsing, just observing): as far as I'm aware, the guns were never fired (although perhaps pointed aggressively), and it was quite plausibly IMO part of the fed's decisions to stand down there, rather than repeat Waco or Ruby Ridge.
You're right, of course. I think the difference relevant to this situation is that the Bundys were banking on the feds playing by the rules, but the protestors in MN appear to have it as a starting premise that they aren't.
Just the opposite. "I can carry a gun and get in their way, and they wouldn't dare shoot me!" is banking on ICE playing by rules that they weren't playing by. Debate over whether they "should have been" aside, they demonstrably did not.
In contrast, Bundys brought a lot of men with rifles and willingness to use them. That's what you do when you're serious about enforcing rules that the other side wouldn't ordinarily abide by.
+1, I think your interpretation is a more accurate one in terms of true beliefs. The protestors in MN definitely didn't think that they were going to get shot, but the disconnect between thinking that these are evil nazi thugs killing anyone they want but that they won't shoot you is the confusing thing for me. Saying one thing, acting on another.
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