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 -
Quite a lot of people who casually talk about wanting someone in prison clearly want the prisoner-to-be to suffer. I don't think the precise difference in sadism matters.
Nearly everyone knows prison sucks, many perceive that prison is more cruel and arbitrary in practice than intended by the law (the old "don't drop the soap in the shower", etc). They still want their enemies in prison, often gleefully emphasizing the cruel and arbitrary parts.
On the other hand, the attitude to corporal punishment as something that might seem cruel but actually done out of necessity and desire to reform is as old as time. "Spare the rod and spoil the child".
"Seems cruel but is done out of necessity" is usually used as a rationalization for wanting to be cruel to someone where it is socially unacceptable to admit directly.
Compare "I don't hate the sinner, I just hate the sin" (as a rationalization for hating the sinner).
Sure.
Would you believe me if I told you I consider it more cruel to lock someone up for five years than receive ten rattan strikes?
If you were coming at it from a negative point of view (they are cruel so I should avoid them) I'd believe you are sincere. If you were coming at it from a positive point of view (we should hurt criminals and prison hurts them more) I'd say that you are not acting like most humans who wish to punish.
We should hurt criminals in a way that averses them from criminality while minimizing crippling consequences. If we destroy criminals they become a burden on society and quite possibly recidivists. You can avoid that by jailing for life/execution/exile but you can't reasonably apply the capital punishment to every crime.
I don't think most humans who wish to punish are usually satisfied with a criminal receiving a single session of caning and walking free. Usually people want the criminal to "rot in prison", to use a common expression.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
If you offered me both, I know I'd chose the rattan strikes, easily. I don't know how low the time in jail and high the amount of strikes would have to be for me to, not knowing precisely how painful the strikes are, prefer the opposite, but in my ignorance I would at least exchange up to 20 strikes for a year.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link