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 argument doesn’t address the empirical evidence of SNAP fraud, like the half of Somali Americans using it or its high rate in Haredi enclaves. One example, another example. Your argument isn’t for the ideal charity distribution system, but for an unvetted system run by people I will never meet with a terrible track record of punishing fraud. It may even be a corrupt system designed specifically to be used by fraudsters. When I read that millionaires were getting benefits and their only punishment when caught was repaying the benefits back, I lose all faith in authorities administering the system forever, and no longer support the system.
In most cases, Jesus required pistis in return for charitable healing, and in those areas without pistis, no healing could be done. We translate this word as “faith”, and take it to mean a vague, confident belief in a set of facts. But its original meaning entailed a whole social dimension of allegiance and faithful loyalty. Jesus healed His allegiant followers, those who had fidelity to His new Kingdom of Loyalists and all that this meant. This is important to keep in mind. When Jesus praised the faith of the centurion, it wasn’t because he was especially certain of a set of facts, but because he said, “I am not worthy to have you come under my roof, but only say the word, and my servant will be healed. For I too am a man under authority, with soldiers under me. And I say to one, ‘Go,’ and he goes, and to another, ‘Come,’ and he comes, and to my servant, ‘Do this,’ and he does.”.
We also find in the Didache an exhortation to give freely to members and a condemnation against anyone who takes without need. And this is in a pre-selected group of Christians: they have already pledged full allegiance to the cause and there are elders leading them with the ability to excommunicate.
I think this all makes sense from an instinctive basis. We have an instinct to give to those in need, and we have an instinct to hate those who take advantage of us. The ideal system maximizes giving and minimizes fraud. It’s probably not a good idea to have a national system of administering benefits, unless you are willing to investigate and heavily punish fraud. I mean, I highly doubt you would be fine with me just stealing $20 from you, right? Could I justify this theft with “charity does not demand moral virtue?” This is the same thing on a population-wide scale.
More options
Context Copy link