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 -
Sure, this only really works on the scale of a single store or restaurant: instead of offering both kosher and non-kosher (or halal and non-halal: the same principle applies, and for most non-Jews and non-Muslims the impact is similar) food, the easier choice is often to drop the type alienating a minority of customers entirely. Though for something like a chain supermarket, or Amazon that's a unified marketplace dominated by a single store (that is also invested in reputation of its partners), this logic also holds, with minor caveats.
I agree that Taleb's example with peanut allergy and peanut non-availability on planes would be more apt. But people with allergies are not really a political block and it has more to do with insurance, probably.
Can you easily find pork in Israel? I can't in Turkey.
I don't know how it looks in theory, but I do know how it works in practice. In practice, in the US, the number of kosher restaurants outside of the "Jewish" areas is vanishingly small. On the contrary, the number of non-kosher restaurants in, say, Israel is quite decent. I didn't ever bother to pinpoint why exactly Taleb's argument doesn't work there, but it is absolutely clear it does not, and thus why it does not becomes rather a theoretical exercise.
Yes, very easily. For example, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiv_Ta'am or here: https://mania-m.co.il/ (sorry their English site seems to be broken, but the pictures are pretty clear).
There are also many restaurants that do not serve pork, but still do not maintain official kosher certification - either because of costs, or because of limitations on recipes and processes that involves. E.g. cheeseburger is very much not kosher, even if you use kosher beef. Thus, McDonalds has 2/3 of his locations is Israel non-kosher and 1/3 kosher (no cheeseburgers there, obviously). They do use kosher meat (so here Taleb's theory is correct - it'd be uneconomical to use two different types of beef) in both kinds.
Is kosher beef not much more expensive than non-kosher? In the USA there is a difference in price of 2-3 times. I have a hard time imagining that not making it economical to use two different types of beef.
I think in Israel, it wouldn't be much more expensive in practice, because you won't find any local supplier that would be big enough to supply McDonalds and yet not already set up to supply kosher beef - because most of other large consumers in Israel do want kosher meat. Meat is quite expensive in Israel, and limits on import is one of the reasons. But I think this applies to non-kosher beef too, which likely would be imported. In general, meat politics in Israel is complex and pretty bizzare and changing a lot, I am sure I'm not up to date on all the details.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link