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 -
GK Chesterton and MAGA
Chesterton personifies the paradoxes he loves to pursue in his writing. A member of the Fabian (socialist) party, he is remembered primarily as a bulwark of conservatism. Deeply immersed in early 20th century high British society and culture, he was Catholic rather than Church of England. Writing prose and poetry on the transcendence of family, he never had children.
A populist, he writes a warning to MAGA.
To be sure, Chesterton does not shy away from condemning progressive society. In one memorable anecdote he tells a relativist that in a functioning democracy, the relativist would be burned on a pyre. In his pithy essay "The Return of the Barbarian" (1934), Chesterton states "I do not mean that any of that sort of liberty or laxity or liberal-mindedness has ever had anything to do with civilization." Yet Chesterton writes the essay not as a warning against Liberalism, but to identify the rising Nationalist Socialism of Germany as the true enemy of civilization. Even though the civilization may be decadent, flabby, and decayed, civilization must still fight for civilization. For barbarism is an uncontrollable beast. It contains no introspection, no self-corrective. Chesterton ends the essay in his typical incisive style:
"There are many marks by which anybody of historical imagination can recognize the recurrence: the monstrous and monotonous omnipresence of one symbol, and that a symbol of which nobody knows the meaning; the relish of the tyrant for exaggerating even his own tyranny, and barking so loud that nobody can even suspect that his bark is worse than his bite; the impatient indifference to all the former friends of Germany, among those who are yet making Germany the only test—all these things have a savor of savage and hasty simplification, which may, in many individuals, correspond to an honest indignation or even idealism, but which, when taken altogether, give an uncomfortable impression of wild men who have merely grown weary of the complexity that we call civilization." [Emphasis added].
As a confirmed MAGAt myself, I feel a distinct discomfort reading this warning. There is a cold nihilism and gleeful cruelty in the MAGA intelligentsia. The rank-and-file MAGA populists cower from modern complexity, preferring the comfort of totalizing and simple narratives. If MAGA feels less barbaric than the Brown Shirts it may only be because our civilization doesn’t have the will or vitality to produce real barbarians.
Yet what is else is the solution when faced with Weimar problems? Chesterton lived in the relatively prudish Britain, and did not need to directly confront the debauchery of Weimar Germany. Easy for him to work within his civilization to promote his conceptualization of the common good. What would he have suggested when faced with the ubiquitous celebration of buggery or an importation of an alternative "civilization"?
But, of course, Chesterton (or rather, custom and common sense as channeled by Chesterton) does have the solution. In his essay "On the Instability of the State" he counters the prevailing notions of the Total State by satirizing the ephemerality of modern nations. In contrast, true societal stability is only found in the Family, the bedrock on which all civilization stands. And while the modern assault on the Family threatens to break civilization as assuredly as any barbarian uprising, it is still an institution that takes only two willing companions and the providence of God to initiate. And it is on this rock that the next great civilization will be built. "In the break-up of the modern world, the Family will stand out stark and strong as it did before the beginning of history."
Honestly, this resonated with me in the sense that a lot of left-leaning people I've talked with are OK with:
Meanwhile, someone on the left could make their own list of what right-leaning people are doing:
I think our nation is broken and I'm sad about it. I do not know how to restore a sense of common brotherhood between the blue haired Karen and the MAGA HVAC repair guy. If we're lucky we'll get attacked from the outside and band together against a common threat. If we're unlucky I think we'll just struggle against each other until one group loses all hope of pretense to power.
I think that the Trump administration displays unique characteristics which were not displayed by recent other presidents.
There is his utter inability to even understand that some people use language to communicate information about the state about that hypothetical generalization of human perception we call reality, sadly imitated by his underlings. If he is making noises which might sound to the initiated like factual claims about how many dog sleds defend Greenland, anyone who has followed him for more than two tweets will notice that he is utterly incapable of making anything which is a factual claim. Presumably, if he were to call 911 to report that the White House was on fire, the operator would simply wonder what political message he would want to transport with that.
Likewise, he seems dangerously removed from a common understanding of the upper classes how things are done, the informal rules on how society is conducted. When Biden pardoned his son, that was noteworthy, scandalous. With the Trump administration, pardons of political allies, people who bribe him by buying his shitcoin etc is not a scandal but a Tuesday.
This also makes him certainly more unpredictable. A sane-ish, elite ruler might certainly make decisions which are terrible for the country, but will likely fail in predictable ways, like some king starting a stupid war he can't win. A ruler not bound by elite expectations is much more likely to find novel and exciting failure modes, like le terreur or WW2. Sometimes out-of-the-box thinking is useful, but often the box was placed there intentionally. GWB and his cronies, for all their many faults, would not have tried to dismantle free trade or dismantle the alliance the US had build under the banner of the polite fiction of the international rule-based order.
While I am sure that a lot of the grassroot left is lying, I think their leadership is a bit better. OTOH, from the WH you will get plenty of takes on laws which are just plain wrong.
ICE can arrest an US citizen for disrupting their work illegally, sure. But detaining someone on the suspicion of them being an illegal immigrant seems to be a-ok only if the arestee is not a citizen. The government rounding up people and IDing them, effectively forcing their focus groups to carry proof of citizenship on pain of being hassled for a few hours feels very Unamerican.
Democratic leadership is not doing too well in the truth department either. Walsh said ICE is not law enforcement. for instance.
No, looks like you feel for misinformation as well. Unless by a-ok you mean some value judgement outside the law. Congress explicitly gave ICE the power (without warrant) "to interrogate any alien or person believed to be an alien as to his right to be or to remain in the United States;" (8 USC 1357) (emphasis mine)
We have a very recent Supreme Court case (Noem v. Vasquez Perdomo) that helps us understand both what ICE's operating parameters are and that they are within the bounds of law. Someone can be detained by ICE on reasonable suspicion that they are violating immigration law or is involved with a violation of U.S. immigration law by another person. If there is reasonable suspicion, ICE is allowed to stop someone, ask them for ID, if they do not have ID on their person then ask for identifying details like name and address, and run them through a database to try to narrow down their immigration status.
For an example of reasonable suspicion, there was an incident where someone (let's call him Bob) saw another person with an ignored final removal order being arrested by ICE. Bob fled in another direction. Fleeing from officers creates reasonable suspicion! Perhaps that is what Bob intended. The ICE officers left the person they were there for and chased after him. He was arrested, refused to answer questions, and was taken into custody so that his identity could be determined. Bob is a US citizen, but taking him into custody seems reasonable and A-ok to me!
ICE’s policy is that no one can be lawfully taken into custody, or even questioned, on the basis of skin color. Ethnicity is never on it's own a sufficient basis for probable cause, or even reasonable suspicion. However, several factors when taken together can create reasonable suspicion:
the types of job they worked (people unlawfully present disproportionately work in certain kinds of jobs)
presence at particular locations (people unlawfully present are disproportionately found at certain places, like car washes and construction sites)
language and accent (people unlawfully present disproportionately speak languages other than English, or speak English with a heavy accent)
apparent race or ethnicity.
The Supreme Court agreed with ICE on this assessment that in combination (though not in isolation) these factors can create reasonable basis for a Terry Stop.
Refusing to cooperate with a Terry Stop, refusing to roll down your window, show ID, get out of the vehicle when asked, etc, are all things that will get you arrested, whether it is ICE or your local beat cop who's trying to talk with you.
It's normal to see the underclass act badly when stopped by the police. What's been weird is seeing middle-aged PMC respond to reasonable police requests like someone caught driving on a weed binge. The only reason they are acting like that is because they've been told it's right and just to act like that.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link