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 don’t believe the Trump admin could frame the shootings as a mistake. That would imply incompetence. That makes them look weak.
One issue with social media these days is now everyone understands the tactics of protestors and thus know also the counter tactics to deploy. The media can not just control one narrative. The alt narratives gets promoted just as much. The counter to the counter movements is out there.
Furthermore, in the age of social media we now have video so protestors can’t just push until something happens. Good won’t just be lost soccer mom who happened to get in ICE way. Pretti won’t be “just directing tactic”. Someone will have video of him kicking ICE vehicles in a prior encounter. In the ‘60s. Goode would be a civil rights icon who was just dropping the kids off at school who the nazis shot.
The entire school segregation move and the evil parents yelling back in the day may have fizzled out after a few viral videos of white kids getting their ass kicked by black kids during segregation.
The two narrative world is what we live in today. The old protest movements do not work as well when it’s become trivial for dual narratives to be maintained.
At least in private, I don't think even the most based Trump supporters will claim that the rank and file ICE are some fit and well-trained force with high tactical acumen. You can't hire and train that many people that quickly and expect to get great results. Indeed, they probably know this much more keenly than everyone else.
Of course, that's part of the whole game of chicken.
Might have gone even harder if it was viral videos of white parents beating up a 15 year old black kid in a newly integrated school.
With the exception of the Pretti shooting, all the atrocity videos I've seen with them have been very much less atrocious than the kind of normal police arrest videos you can find all over the Internet. Which is probably why some of the ICE atrocity videos are actually other police forces doing some actual beatings that are then attributed to ICE.
Yeah but there are far fewer ICE agents.
So if the outrage-sampled videos are about the same; it tells you something about the base prevalence.
How is this supposed to make sense? He said that that the outraged-sampled videos of ICE aren't actually that outrageous compared to the non-outraged-sampled videos of other police forces. In other words, they are not the same.
Also even if they were the same, it tells you nothing about the prevalence. You have no idea how many actually outrageous videos there are available for either group.
They are both outrage-sampled. No videos that aren't good scroll bait material are passing through the filter.
And in any case you can make some inference about the underlying distribution. There are 20K ICE agents and 750K sworn law enforcement, about a 35x ratio. Even accounting for sampling bias, if you find comparable (even if more for LEOs) behavior at the margin, it's pretty damning.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
We have all the video in every direction. The propaganda works anyway; the left-wing "ICE IS EVIL" message gets across to normies, the right-wing "The protestors are violent and obstructive and ICE is arresting people they are supposed to arrest" does not, it's dismissed as Fox News (which, even if it were reported as such, doesn't count, because the other side controls the credibility of any given media organ) propaganda.
Are there any "normies" as undecided voters willing to be persuaded by red or blue side by facts, logic and reason?
How many such people are left (if they ever existed). Everything looks that polarization is complete, there is blue and red side hardened in their camps (and equally hardened grey non voting, non caring mass that refuses to participate).
I imagine plenty of normal, average people are undecided voters, so that certainly is plausible. However, as humans are only rarely persuaded by facts, logic and reason in a real sense, I'd say such normies exist, but are a small minority. A normie is, by definition, someone not exposed to anything outside the mainstream, be that anything of political nature or not.
More options
Context Copy link
Normies are all over the place, but they're not undecided voters. They're Democrats-by-default.
More options
Context Copy link
Plenty, I routinely voted democrat or libertarian, 2024, I voted for Trump. I live in one of the top 10 most contested/important counties in the country. I was persuaded by facts, logic, and reason. And I will be again in 2026 and 2028. Considering Trump won the popular vote in 2024, something that hasn't happened in forever and sure as hell didn't happen in 2016 or 2020, I think screeching that there aren't independent swing voters left is just an excuse to engage in accelerationism.
I've beaten this drum before, and I'll beat it again. If you post political content online in anyway, you are not normal. You are not the average voter. And there is a good chance you exist in a bubble. You can either be unaware of it, or acknowledge it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link