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 -
No need for another Civil Rights Act when the original is fit for purpose.
Per the official docket, Don Lemon along with three others; Trahern Crews, Georgia Fort, and Jamael Lundy, have been indicted by a Federal Grand Jury on charges of violating US Code Title 18 - 241, "Conspiracy against rights". Specifically the free-exercise clause of the first amendment in regards to the congregation of Cities Church of St. Paul MN.
USC 18-241 reads...
Based on clips from Lemon's own livestream I'd say they have him dead-to-rights.
I'm remembering my post last year about how Trump can (lawfully) strike back in the sort of protest-fueling excesses of the Democratic civil war.
I don't think anyone needed to goad Don Lemon into doing something stupid- he hardly needs the help- but for all that the recent Mineapolis shootings gave Trump/ICE a political black eye, I think they've also demonstrated the sort of political solvent effect of the democratic civil war as factions nominally unify against Trump, actively compete for the kudos of opposing Trump, but also stand to benefit for when Trump turns on one or another faction for its excesses.
In just the last few weeks, after all, the most recent Dem VP has functionally ended his political career and said he'll never run for election again, a government shutdown effort couldn't even form various party members said nope so fast, various Democratic governors and AGs have had widely divergent stances on opposing ICE, with the relatively hardcore anti-IC AGs getting minimal political support from 2026 establishment frontrunners like Newsom. Rather than nation-wide anti-ICE riots following two shootings, the best the party is managing is another No Kings nationwide protests, which are almost certainly going to try and enforce a peaceful protest persona as a contrast to the anti-ICE tactics of MN.
This isn't a verdict of victory or defeat one way or another, but I think it is demonstrative that the party conflict is dynamic, and more importantly dynamic in a way that does give the Trump administration a number of legal ways to go after not-so-edge actors, even with many hostile/oppositional judges in the judiciary. And these cases, in turn, are probably going to catch not-so-minor players in the Democratic Party civil war, shaping the trajectory in ways some people will not only try to capitalize on, but set conditions for.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link