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 -
Your post seems to be a lot of sneering, but is very light on facts.
But that's the thing: my choice is earn techbro wage$ and be productive, or go on welfare and have a lot less.
The people being non-virtuous are folks whose choice is earning an amount of money comparable to what they get from welfare, or just being lazy and getting the same amount for doing nothing. Slightly dated numbers, but you can see here that lots of people whose market income is low are gaining advantage by being lazy: https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/attachments/11-15-2012-MarginalTaxRates.pdf
The market value of being lazy goes up quite a bit in many blue areas. For example a "poor" person who gets to live in a NYC apartment is getting at least $62k/year in rent subsidies alone.
That's why most of these folks make the deliberate choice to not work, or even look for work, for even 26 weeks/year. https://www.bls.gov/opub/reports/working-poor/2021/
I'm confused. You seem to be sneering at this claim, but you aren't explicitly saying it's false. It's well known to be true that SSDI is mostly just another welfare program, acknowledged by academics and left wing news sources alike:
https://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/
https://www.bostonfed.org/-/media/Documents/economic/conf/great-recovery-2016/Alan-B-Krueger.pdf
It's true that my personality aligns well with many conservative principles. I get joy from work - both techbro stuff and low paid stuff like construction - and I don't get much joy from vices like crime, drug use or gluttony. You are correct that I probably would not enjoy the life of a wrecker (to use the socialist term) or welfare queen (to use the conservative term).
Lets try to distinguish two separate claims:
Which of these are you claiming?
In any case I can square the circle pretty easily with an analogy you'll probably understand. I don't have any desire to rape children. It's very easy for me not to become a pedophile - literally no effort required. Some folks don't have it so easy - they want to rape children just as much as I want to consensually bang hot asian gym girls. I feel sorry for the desires that those folks seem to be innately stuck with. I still think society should produce incentives that steer them away from raping children.
No? While I agree that he used a lot of words, this is the motte, and there was plenty of content for those words. Conservatives think that there is a transcendent moral order and are more upset at food stamps mostly benefit those who violate it than any of its incidental effects.
Now I would disagree with him that the motte is a hub of classical conservatism- lots of right libertarians, lots of nrx adjacent, lots of rationalists who are above all deeply frustrated with democrat party academese lunacy more than with GOP proleslop populism. But it was a coherent point about food stamps.
More options
Context Copy link
Your priorities seem really whack. Why limit your banging to hot Asian gym girls? Subtract Asian and gym. Don’t discriminate against hot girls!
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link