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 -
The idea that right-wing dominated forums would have any sort of moral superiority (in terms of the average rate of dogpiling, etc. behavior by users) over left-wing dominated ones in some general/average/typical/categorical sense - or the reverse - is one I find so utterly absurd* and detached from reality that it's something that I'd only charitably infer as a claim by someone on TheMotte if they actually explicitly make that specific claim. I don't see anything in the comment to which you replied nor this comment thread in general where I would feel comfortable inferring such a claim. It seems to me that the comment is about the experience of individual users who tend to "rock the boat" with respect to the dominant side in the forum.
And it seems to me to be about the specific state of things right now; i.e. leftists do have easy access to lots of online echochambers in a way that rightists don't; as such, regardless of how both leftists and rightists are exactly as likely to fall victim to their natural human biases when managing forums they dominate, we see an emergent property of the types of leftists and rightists who congregate at different types of forums. I'm not the original commenter, but it seems to me that reading some sort of moral judgment, either about groups, forums, sides, etc. in the comment to which you replied is jumping to conclusions.
* I find this absurd, because, besides being just completely obviously completely impossible to adjudicate in any way, it also has basically no consequence for anything in terms of how people actually interact with each other and forums. It's not as if there's some movement that claims, "right-wingers are non-coincidentally, non-incidentally, morally superior to left-wingers in terms of maintaining good faith discussion forum standards, and therefore, for the betterment of discourse throughout society, we should make all forums right-wing dominated" or whatever (except in the tautological case where people redefine "values logic, empiricism, evidence over emotion" as "right-wing."). I mean, maybe there is, but it's certainly not one that has any meaningful influence.
More options
Context Copy link