site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 13, 2026

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.

3
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Although frankly, the idea that we should be consulting children on the kind of discipline they are subject to seems pretty stupid.

Maybe less stupid than consulting the rabble on the kind of laws they are subject to, considering they destroy civilization when they choose wrong, but kids in school just have a little more fun, since school is pointless anyway.

I mean, I'm 100% behind banning stuff like infinite scroll, but it's not like there's a big button governments can press that says 'make the digital world not addictive'.

Governments could ban infinite scroll, start at a fine of $10 million per day of any company commanded to remove infinite scroll. I bet it will be gone quickly.

I mean, really think about what that would entail. You'd have to ban video games, youtube, dating apps, Reddit and a bunch of other stuff I haven't thought of.

No, you don't have to be any more consistent than your take on schools and democracy. The government is a murderous asshole that goes on random violent rampages over small triggers, it is not a Kantian philosopher attempting to achieve a perfectly Consistent moral Order of Things.

Addictiveness is just a characteristic of the digital world.

Either-or fallacy. Ponder heroin and cigarettes, if you will.

The very fact that such a high number would want to delete a technology that is so integrated into their lives should give you pause for thought.

Maybe it wouldn't replicate.

Teenagers in the 1920s didn't want to ban the radio, kids in the 50s didn't wish they lived in a world without television.

You don't know that.

I've read both of these books but I really don't understand what point you're trying to make here. Could you clarify?

How? What's confusing you?