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 -
Well does the society of UK circa 1976 exist today? Coal miners. British Steel. The Mid Atlantic accent. Roger Moore. Rumpole of the Bailey. That Britain is dead and gone, it may as well be another world.
This isn't quite a 'change happens so you should accept bad change' post. It's certainly bad if high-quality peoples like the British are dying off. But I don't think we have to care about sustainability into the long term future like we used to. 50 years is too far away. Reduce TFR to 0, why not? AI will certainly be good enough to compensate within 10 years, let alone 50.
How does TFR matter? We invest in a society that produces children today. In 18 years the kid is qualified to be an entry level worker, after 100s of thousands more in investment? +4 years for university? What is the estimated return of this? I say zero. That kid is not going to be militarily, economically, politically relevant. The AI of 2044, when he is 18, will be overwhelmingly more capable than he is. Society is a machine for producing and distributing resources, so that groups can enjoy wealth and military power. That's why we have culture and capitalism and politics.
It would of course be ideal if we had healthy, confident, advancing civilizations rooted in correct values rather than delusions. But the fact that we don't may not be fatal. It's harmful mostly in the delusions damaging or derailing the transition in this final stage of human life.
But the distinction is that I don't think we need a real cure, only a quick fix. Better a band-aid than deep cultural medicine if it takes 20 years to work. Better to burn the bond markets, state finances, TFR, climate and social trust as long as the right people control the datacentres and AI models.
I know this is kind of boring as a post, feels like it trivializes and robs the meaning out of every single issue. I think it's fine to talk about non-AI things and not have it injected with AI but I think long-term thinking at this point is a trap.
Right, you hit on a very important distinction which is that birth rates only matter because of immigration.
If your society is 98% indigenous and tfr falls through the floor, and mass automation replaces most or all jobs, this isn’t really a problem. In fact, as long as consumption rises, which it easily can, everyone lives a better life, has more space, etc. This is not really a problem. The economics of population will change in an age of mass automation anyway. Koreans will still exist (assuming the stalemate with the north holds), there will just be fewer of them, which is fine. They will remain in control of their destiny.
If your society is diverse and divided, then you have to care, because these people are your neighbours and their children will be your children’s neighbours (and yours if you lead a long life), and they will have the same vote that you do, and they are probably having more kids than you.
It's not a problem unless you're the SOB born at the exact wrong time to benefit from either family support or welfare (or AI)
The country/ethnic group will survive but it's not gonna be fun for you personally. Which is a major incentive, in people's eyes, to not fight immigration or the dominant pro-immigration parties.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link