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 -
They have sufficient power to demand the privilege.
The argument that both you and @ThisIsSin are making would appear to endorse "the heckler's veto" and by extension the idea that "might makes right".
I reject this argument on the basis that each and everyone of us is (presumably at least) a human being with free will, and as such may choose to refuse their demands at any time.
Abel doesn't have to do anything.
Whether might makes right or not, it is still might. I am not discussing what "we" should do; I am discussing what "we" can do.
Whatever the demand, you can refuse, and they can punish you until you are compliant, dead, or irrelevant.
Except that as men like Trump and Rubio, and states like Florida and Mississippi continue to demonstrate, we know how to create better outcomes and we can just do that.
You can, temporarily, in a few places, do a thing. But the backlash for you winning any political power (whether you do anything with it or not) will allow them to take over, permanently, and erase your gains.
Says who?
What evidence do you have to back up this claim?
Take a look at what is happening in Newark. The left is physically attacking DHS agents, and DHS can do nothing about it because neither the state nor the Federal District of New Jersey will back them up. They're reduced to dumb ideas like ending all sanctuary city international flights (which would be enjoined by said judges anyway). Even when the right holds the formal titles, the left continues to hold power and legitimacy. The left is a juggernaut.
The left may hold "power" in Newark, but "power" is not "legitimacy" unless you are in fact endorsing the idea that "might makes right".
I would observe that whether the left is "a juggernaut" is completely orthogonal to whether they are "right" or "wrong" or whether they ought to be opposed or not. In the meantime you have yet to provide any evidence that right-wing victories outside of New Jersey are helping rather than harming the left-wing agenda nationwide.
The left holds both power and legitimacy. Its dictates will be obeyed voluntarily by all but parts of the executive branch of the Federal Government, while that branch is treated as if it were an outlaw. The people do not back up the Feds under Trump, nor do the courts, nor do the states. They do not have legitimacy; their opponents do. Only the left can govern in America because the right will (mostly) accept the left's legitimacy when they win (yes, even after 2020) while the left simply will not accept the right's in any case.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link