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 am going to be maximally cynical and say this is how justice works in our brave new diverse society.
I agree with the interpretation by @Rov_Scam that this case is probably a conviction for involuntary manslaughter at trial, at most. It would also be a total media circus.
The incumbent DA is a Dem who was appointed in 2021 and won a “non-partisan” election in 2022 over a Republican challenger. He’s up for reelection this year but I don’t see any news stories about a challenger. The filing deadlines have now passed.
This is the DA. Does this look like a man who wants a series of attack ads from a non-white lefty Dem challenger calling him a vicious racist who’s persecuting a poor oppressed immigrant for exercising his first amendment rights? The DA is the son of Ukrainian immigrants (talk about an American success story), but that won’t save him from being called an oppressor and racist.
He wouldn’t stand a chance against a non-white challenger who could credibly signal that he’d never prosecute
a Muslim for killing an old Jewan oppressed immigrant who was exercising his first amendment rights and advocating on behalf of other oppressed peoples when a rude counter-protestor caused a scuffle that led to the counter-protestor’s accidental death. He’s safe for the 2026 election, but does he want to deal with a recall petition? Especially when his “victory” in this case might be a conviction for involuntary manslaughter where the judge has heavily signaled that he’ll be lenient?Judge Malan won his election in 2024. He won’t need to run again until 2028, but does he want a media circus from this case? I doubt it. How'd that work out for the judge in the Brock Turner case?
The series of continuances that pushed this case (over 2 years old) out past the filing deadline for a challenger to the DA? It doesn't take much cynicism to see the motivation behind that.
With this outcome, the defendant gets what he wants. The prosecutor closes the case and gets to make a fuss about the judge being too lenient but whatchagonnado (and conveniently avoids riling up a loud segment of the Dem base that might cause him to face a recall or lose the next election). The judge gets to avoid a media circus in his courtroom and avoid generating bad publicity for his next election.
The victim’s family and friends and ethnic group are going to be mad about it, but what are they going to do? Vote for the non-existent Republican?
More options
Context Copy link