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 -
Bud Selig-Barry Bonds.
I guess baseball is the American past time so it’s fertile field for finding a parallel for American politics and in this case asylum abuse.
Steroids were of course illegal back when Bonds and everyone else was doing them. Bonds is not in the HOF because he took steroids despite having a legitimate argument for being the GOAT. I’ve never agreed a HOF should have a morality clause. The villains can get in too. It’s in the name “fame”. But this is basically a way of declaring Bonds a criminal. Selig is conveniently in the HOF. I have never understood this about the HOF since Selig was the enforcer of the rules and it always seemed to me like he made steroids unofficially legal.
Asylum under the Biden administration is very similar in my opinion. Asylum laws were never designed for people like Conejo. Everyone knows this. He is clearly an economic migrant. This is also weirdly basically a holocaust law in design since it’s from the post-war period. We have a Democratic process for making laws and Biden clearly allowed the law not to followed. He’s the Bud Selig in this situation.
Conejo I am going to call an illegal. Even though he claims to be following the asylum laws if he actually understood the law he would know the law doesn’t apply to him. He’s frauding America. I am not sure if a Spanish first person is even capable of understanding the word asylum or read the legalese; he just has counsel telling him to sign here etc and say these words. He’s of course my Barry Bonds in the situation. Following the system by how it is working during the 2020-2024 and not the spirit or letter of the law.
Obviously we need to just deport the guy if we want to be a nation of laws. You can’t care if he has a cute 5 year old kid with him or then the first thing anyone who sneaks into the country will do is get their gf pregnant and then hide for 9 months. And that’s basically open borders with zero control over who lives here.
I guess this is just more evidence that Biden was the villain either thru choice or dementia. If you want the rule of law to mean anything then we need to follow the law honesty and you can’t have huge gaps in what the law means like asylum.
I’ll joke I am a fascists now. That’s because I don’t think we have or had the rule of law recently. At which point opting-out of our system is just recognizing what has already happened. Legitimacy was already losts.
For the record I do think first safe country can be a little stretchy. For Venezuelans they come close to the purpose of asylum legalese. And I think it can be argued when you have 10 million asylum seekers it would be unreasonable for them to all go to the first safe country which is basically Colombia. If you view them as legitimate asylum seekers then it would be reasonable to spread them out across the major countries in the Americas. I don’t think during WW2 people would reason Switzerland needed to accept 10m Jews. If you also view Venezuelans as legitimate asylum seekers then I think creating 10m asylum migrants makes an US-Venezuelan hostilities as Just War with the US being the hegemon of the Americas.
More options
Context Copy link