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 think a lot of people misunderstand what First Amendment means. It protects the freedom of speech, but it doesn't mean anything you do with speech is now outside the law. It means you can not be prosecuted just for speaking, but if you speech was part of another crime - fraud, murder, insurrection, conspiracy to obstruct law enforcement, any crime - then you can be punished for that crime, and 1A would not shield you just because your participation used speech as a medium. It's of course more complex, but the point is - you can exercise your 1A rights and still be prosecuted, if conspiring to attack ICE officers is a prosecutable offense. It'd be probably hard to upgrade it to felony murder because the prosecution would have to prove direct causal link between what somebody said and the actions that led to death - which will be very hard to do, since nobody probably told them explicitly "now go and drive over ICE officer that is standing on the corner of This and That!" (though Good's partner, saying "drive baby drive!", could be in legal jeopardy for that, if the feds would want to go after her). But if feds can establish the causal link between something said on the char and some lawless action, like attacking ICE officers, then they have a basis for prosecution. If they find an organizational structure (which is almost certainly there, the question is whether the feds can find the hard evidence for it) then they could also employ RICO which doesn't even require causal links. But Republicans, for whatever reason, have been very reluctant to use RICO against the militant left.
More options
Context Copy link