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 -
I've found the far leftists to be a lot easier to engage with than the shifty trend followers. We disagree on everything, but I get along pretty well with proper communists. At least they've read their first sources and reason from a concerted set of first principles.
Why would any of the reasonable ones hold this belief to begin with ?
You can't. You can only properly argue with someone who engages with you in good-faith. The second you engage in wrong think, you are considered an enemy, and all avenues for a real discussion are shut down.
UNLESS...........
1.You build a mountain of good faith.
In your closest circle, there is enough good faith, that you can set yourself on (a metaphorical) fire by mentioning these names and still have enough in store to keep them listening.
The people closest to you hopefully know you well enough to not accuse you of 'lacking empathy'.
2.You play the idiot.
Keep asking questions without revealing your preferences. Defer to the person as if they are the expert and you know nothing, while ignorantly poking holes in their ideas. If they get suspicious and start asking questions, reply with something innocuous like , "idk. I just want people to be able to live their best life." If they are engaging in good faith, they should run into a logical-hurdle at some point and at least question their own belief because of it.
One good way to throw questions at them is if you have some unique cultural context that they don't. Eg: The minorities in my country are repressed, but also rich. Refugees in western nations are considered terrorists in their home nation. Or, the military imposes woke ideas in the nation through authoritarian suppression and explicit violence. They don't know enough to counter you. At the very least, they should see the core issue with the non-transferability of woke ideas across cultural contexts.
Things to never do: Don't ever play their jargon games. They will trap you in it. They are better at spouting bullshit than you are. You will only be embarrassed here by the end of it. The Chris-Rufo-esque bastardization of terms like woke/CRT still convey more specifics than a woke-leftist ever would. If you defer argue on their playing field, you will be destroyed before you even open your mouth. Yes, it means that you cannot resolve an argument amicably with someone looking for a fight. Either concede (by playing within their Jargon) or put up a proper fight with a Rufo-esque fight-fire-with-fire approach. Either ways, if you end up angry at the end of it, then might as well go down swinging.
There's immunity against this tactic; it's called being a concern troll.
Also, even asking honest questions that are merely neutral on issues important to the left verboten in many circles.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link