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 -
It's about control of the media, but also, having a mass movement of people willing to coordinate resistance. The right is bad at this because they believe in the legitimacy of the system, and in working toward the changes they want via the legitimate means provided by the system. The left basically believes that any system that does not result in their desired outcome is not legitimate, and are therefore a lot more willing to resort to extralegal means when they don't get their way.
What this means in practice is that the right will sit by and think "aww shucks it's a shame that guy got arrested for violating that magazine ban" and hope that maybe one of these days the 9th circuit will stop ignoring clear SCOTUS directives (spoiler: they won't). The left, meanwhile, will organize illegal street blockades where armed activists illegally detain motorists in order to check if they're feds, and face zero legal consequences because they elected an attorney general who self-identifies as antifa.
I think it'd make sense here for you to explain in a bit more detail what the word "system" exactly entails here.
Essentially, the entire apparatus that produces and legitimizes political power and authority in the US. The constitution plus the processes and institutions that have grown around it, such as the parties and everything they get up to.
So I guess the Left largely believes that the legislative branch is somehow beyond their influence?
I would say it's more like, the left does not limit themselves to acting through the legislature, because they don't care about whether their methods are legitimized by the system or not. They care about getting their way.
The right cares a lot more about rules and principles and is a lot more willing to accept defeat on individual issues because they think that a stable order which obeys predictable rules is more important than any particular issue.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You confuse the government and the system. It's a common mistake, and the whole effort of having The Constitution and writing a lot of paperwork before, during, and after it was to avoid it. You see, the government is only part of the system, and is designed to be a limited and constrained part. A very important one, but still one of the parts, not the goal, but the means to the goal. And that's exactly what a lot of conservatives (and many non-conservatives) believe in - the government has its legitimate function, as as long as it is performing it, it has its place and should be supported. As soon as it departs from this function, it ceases to be legitimate and becomes evil. The system is where The People can prevent the government from becoming evil (or at least minimize it) and that's what was the goal built specifically into the American system, and yes, the right, largely, believes in it's legitimacy - at least while it is working at its purpose, stopping the government from descending into evil.
More options
Context Copy link
have you ever met conservatives? conservatives believe in the legitimacy of the system and its institutions even as they're weaponized against them for decades
they may complain about it, they may object to it, they may distrust it, but the moment you want them to do something outside or against the system you will have pretty much all mouths shut and heavy and immediate condemnation of others who don't
because they will always abide, they will always accept the idiotic machinations and process manipulations, however illegal, of their political opposition who do not believe in the legitimacy of the government whenever it suits them and actually behave in ways which show that
conservatives are the true believers in the system, they're the last actual liberals, and it's why they have been losing for 80 years even as the system has been turned against them time and time again and it's taken absurd lies and manipulations and harm against them to reach the point at which they have lost this constitutionally prevalent institutional trust which they still default to in most situations
low-effort snarkposts is low effort and wrong to boot
More options
Context Copy link
Sure, the typical conservative does not agree with a lot of government policy or expect the government to behave in ways they approve of
So tell me, what has the right done to change this state of affairs?
Exactly zero right wing people are out in the streets getting themselves shot by cops for interfering with the enforcement of government policies they disapprove of.
The right is voting, and accepting the results when they don't win the vote.
The right accepts the legitimacy of the system even when it produces results they don't approve of.
The left believes that if the system produces results they don't approve of, this is evidence of the illegitimacy of the system, and they engage in extralegal shenanigans to nullify the results of elections that don't go their way.
Actually, yes, absolutely unironically. Despite all the stink raised by Trump, pretty much no consequence happened to it, despite massive evidence of irregularities, and a lot of the dissent suppression effort had been by Republicans themselves. If you want to see how "not accepting" looks like, look at Portland. Or LA or Seattle riots. The right did nothing even close. The only serious protest was Jan 6, which was immediately squashed with unprecedented force and cruelty (that was the point, of course) - and the Republican establishment did absolutely nothing to stop it, until Trump came in with pardons. So yes, despite grumbling and whining and grandstanding, which happens after every single election in the history of all elections, the right absolutely accepted 2020 election results as fait accompli. That doesn't mean they didn't think there was cheating, but they largely accepted that they can't do anything about it and moved on. They didn't refuse to pay taxes, didn't refuse to follow the laws, did not set federal buildings on fire, did not attack federal officers (obvious exceptions excepted), did not form domestic terrorist movements, the governors did not declare war on the Federal government, they did not shoot prominent leftists, did not declare courts illegitimate, did not assassinate the President, etc. That's how accepting looks like.
No more disrespectful that Democrats still whining about Florida recount. Or calling every single election where Republican wins the presidency illegitimate, hacked by Russia, bought by billionaires, subverted by racists, etc. Or calling every single voting security proposal "voter suppression". Trump didn't do 1/10 of what Democrats routinely do when they lose. When Trump won in 2016, the left did a massive pogrom in DC, and nobody batted an eye - everybody knows that's what happens when you cross the left, they get violent. That's just part of the game. But when the right did an extremely mild - by the leftist norms - protest, identical to dozens of "occupations" and "takeovers" and "sit-ins" the left had done every time they didn't like something - suddenly it's the worst political violence since Cain murdered Abel. Because the right is not allowed to do that.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
what did conservatives do as a result of the election being stolen?
after 9 months of idiotic covid hysteria shutdowns and a summer of race riots across the country which the police sat on the sidelines and allowed, the conservatives did what?
they protested in Washington DC in support of a constitutional process in an effort to have their complaints addressed? the capitol police attacked and provoked those at the capitol and the federal government had many embedded informants/agents provocateurs which manipulated the crowd and 1500 people calmly walked through the capitol building
they received zero institutional support whatsoever, the entire government weaponized itself to attack them, and their representatives and near all conservative leaders tripped over themselves throwing them under the bus and cheering some incompetent black cop murdering an unarmed woman with another cop standing directly behind her to the left
your low-effort snarkpost implies this is an example of conservatives not accepting the results but that's exactly what they did
it was a small number MAGA people who rarely identify as conservatives who, at most, went to protest at the capitol and it turned into a riot which was then near-universally condemned by every conservative and used by the state to persecute the right nationwide
the right generally and especially conservatives did accept the stolen election
More options
Context Copy link
Umm... where to start. The numbers are not large, but definitely not zero.
Bundy standoff
Occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge
This sort of makes my point. Your best examples are two incidents from a decade ago that received exactly zero institutional support or even particularly much sympathy. These incidents had zero influence on any law or policy.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link