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 -
Let's talk about the attack in New York.
Six Arrested After Explosive Devices Tossed Near Mamdani’s Home (Bloomberg)
6 arrested after homemade explosive devices at Gracie Mansion protest send people running for cover (New York Post)
This certainly seems concerning... wait... it looks like I got the news wrong. Let's check in with the newspaper of record:
Smoking Jars of Metal and Fuses Thrown at Protest Near Mayor’s House
This was no bomb. It was just a smoking jar of metal and fuses. A stunning and brave counterprotestor who just happened to have a smoking jar of metal and fuses took took the righteous and antiracist action of standing up to nazism by throwing that smoking jar of metal and fuses right into the middle of a crowd. This totally clears things up.
Wait... no.. it looks like that's not quite right. It was a bomb.
I thought the news media couldn't get worse than "firey but mostly peaceful protests." But somehow they've managed to reach a new low. At least with the "mostly peaceful" protests it's technically true. I'm sure >51% of the protests that day were peaceful and a minority set the place ablaze. But this is a clear cut case where a terrorist literally threw a bomb into a crowd, and the NYT rushes to blame the victims for causing unrest and smear them as "vile white supremacists"
It's funny how the article is really trying to mislead readers as to who was the target of this device and who was the perpetrator.
Note that the article is careful to identify which group the mace-sprayer belonged to. But the bomb was thrown by "an 18 year old man."
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link