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 dunno, you're making this guy sound kinda cool.
Posts consisting of "look what this guy said one time!" are still pretty lame, though, so I want to drag it in a different direction.
What kind of candidate should the Democrats run if they want to appeal more to middle class voters?
Can't run anybody too slimy, of course. No association with Harris or Biden or Clinton. Ex-CEOs are probably out, as is anyone who might get called a "coastal elite." Complete novices with fresh-out-of-college social opinions, probably no good either. The centrists want some sort of serious, competent type who promises to fix broken shit without breaking everything else in the process.
I would have naively thought this guy threaded the needle. Combat and leadership experience. Political outsider. Reasonably well-off, but in the only landowning position which has somehow escaped the stink of class envy. Minimal social-justice baggage. Perhaps even passes the "would I have a beer with him?" test.
You're disqualifying him because he's a socialist; that's rather under-specified. He is engaging in the national pastime of bitching about those richer than oneself. I think you'll find it's quite popular across the political spectrum.
The Democrats should run someone who makes voters feel superior and good about themselves, who promises great things, whether they are possible or not. For bonus points, that someone should also give the Democrats a target to direct their hate at and someone to blame when they don't get the great things.
More options
Context Copy link
Yeah I mean far left extremists having a fair shot of winning the most rural state in the nation is just a typical Thursday, right? What else is the Democratic Party supposed to do to appeal to middle America except radicalize further into hating the basis the country is founded on and alternate between lying about being radical and giving it a nice bipartisan face or doubling down on it? The centrists want someone who fixes broken stuff, so they vote in someone who wants to uproot the whole damn thing?
That's not exceptional to you? Radical spiraling is just what everyone should expect, move along, nothing to see here? You make it sound like if you just read a single FCfromSSC post to anyone in America, they'd just accept it at face value as truthful and bat their eyes at you expecting you to get on with your actual point.
He is cool. I think it's funny that he is still in the running after posts of him saying "retard" or disrespecting black people leaked, but it is pretty odd that 3 terms after everyone made fun of conservatives calling Obama a socialist, there are actual socialists running, and the most offensive thing about that is some tattoo he got without thinking too much about it and then got it covered up after learning what it meant.
More options
Context Copy link
At this point, if Democrats are willing to acknowledge that they really do want a central national authority to have as much control over all of our resources as they can practically give it, I think this guy and Mamdani are the perfect candidates.
The crux is whether middle class voters are well represented among those who are willing to acknowledge this.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link