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 -
Can't they just.... not do those things? Not to derail the discussion too far, but I've had similar thoughts about people who are suicidal due to optional aspects of their life such as their specific job. If you're willing to walk away from it all, why not first break all of the conventions and norms in the hope that it makes it better? What's the worst that can happen, you fail to get re-elected?
Advertise less. If you're a popular and well-established candidate who is likely to win, then you can probably win with a lot less time spend collecting donations and spending them advertising yourself. This reduces your chances of re-election in exchange for more time to either spend on yourself or on your real policy work.
Don't travel on the weekends. I assume this is based on wanting to meet and talk to people in your home district to either gather funds or votes and support. Again, this trades re-electibility for freedom.
Don't do that. In this case, you might lose support from your greater political party (and the endorsements), but if you make good policy that aligns with their goals they'll still likely vote for it.
Not really sure how to solve that, other than if you solve 1-3 then this is less of a big deal.
If you're willing to lose the job anyway, then you might as well do it ethically with lower chance of re-election since, worst case scenario, you don't get re-elected. I suppose if you're taking a more partisan perspective maybe running and losing to a candidate in the opposing party is worse than stepping down and being replaced by a newcomer from your own party. But I would think this would be made up for by actually being a better individual within your party while you have the opportunity.
More options
Context Copy link