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 -
My True Life
In my early twenties I was a Marxist, which now in retrospect I realize was not very cool of me. Ironically, what helped me to snap out of it was reading none other than Das Kapital, but not for the reasons you might think - not because of its shabby economics, a field that mystifies me to this day really. What helped me to snap out of it was his account of Victorian England, the industrialization, which, if there's any truth to that account, was a truly awful time and place to be a human. The sources Marx drew on seem legitimate to me to this day and in general it seems like the restructuring of the system chewed through people, wrung them dry, and treated children as disposable material. Marx is at his best as a sociologist, not as an economist; the picture he painted is vivid; it stayed with me and throughout the years this part specifically finally let the cognitive dissonance chew a hole in my worldview: my life is nowhere near as hard as it was during Victorian era. It's actually pretty good. So I started questioning whether I really wanted a violent revolution. Destroy the current social order for what purpose exactly?
Tracing that train of thought backward, I realized over time that I became a leftist during a pretty hard time in my life. My wife and I moved to Canada and suddenly I was separated from my family and friends. I was looking for a job as a self-taught junior software engineer with a bachelor's in a very unrelated and non-technical field, with little experience under my belt - needless to say, I was getting rejected a lot. I also realized that culturally we were pretty different from Canadians and that my language skills, while passable, weren't really all that stellar. I always enjoyed making my friends laugh and now my particular style of humour wasn't landing that well. They say that moving countries is perhaps the hardest thing one can do and I took that warning for granted - my mental health cratered, fell of a cliff. I became a leftist during that time in my life and with hindsight it's of course trivial to conclude that I was unwittingly looking for the cause of my misery and decided capitalism was to blame, not the surrounding circumstances, (or me, *wink wink*). The system was preventing me from living my true life.
Well, even during those years, even though I was subjectively not feeling very good, my life wasn't that bad. I found a job eventually, we became part of a new social circle. I learned how to make people laugh in Canada too (you need to add "I'm joking", completely dry poker face doesn't work). As I restored my mental health, the belief that a revolution is necessary withered away and with it I realized that nothing was really preventing me from living the way I wanted. My true life was the life that I was living then and there. But let's look closer: what did I think my true life entail? What did I think I would be able to do in a shiny new system that I couldn’t do then? I don't think I had a coherent vision: I was playing video games, reading philosophy, watching movies, and learning to play guitar (sounds familiar?), but it felt tremendously important to me to live my true life. I told my wife that when she becomes a professor I want a year off from my job to at least have a taste of this true life. So maybe it just meant do the things above, but without the anxiety of holding down a job at a company where I witnessed some truly ruthless layoffs? Do the things I wanted and not feel depressed? A hilarious detail: I was never delusional about communism requiring people to work more and have less choice. I just thought that communism would provide us all with some sort of meaning in a better way than capitalism can provide now.
I don’t think I was alone in feeling that having a job - and the precarity that comes with it - is something that happens to you. A lot of normies believe that a job is an unavoidable tax on your finite time on Earth and the job ultimately keeps you from whoever you really are. Think about the following archetypes: the software engineer who calls himself a musician, the accountant who's true calling is travelling the world and absorbing other cultures. "I was born in the wrong era" - you heard this one, haven't you? They are all expressing the same underlying conviction: my true life is somewhere else, and all of this isn't it. "My job isn't me. The system is built in a way to steal my time from me."
Circling back, for me, what came first, before any ideology, before any hardships and demanding, unusual circumstances, was crashing full speed into life with the pedal to the metal. I imagined myself as destined for great things even though I hadn't achieved anything special in or outside of school. Despite that, I still thought I was special. Everyone - parents, teachers, friends - told me I was smart, and naturally, what logically follows from being smart is only success and no hardship at all. I learned that I deserve something for being smart. First good grades (plausible in middle and high school, if you know how to appear smart), then a good job (out of this world fantasy). In reality, I mistook appearing smart for being smart, mastered the former, and thought it was a substitute for the latter.
It turned out that real life is hard work, paying the bills, boredom, groceries, job searching, compromise, family obligations, limited time, limited talent. What stung most was that life punished all those years I spent fucking around instead of learning how to study - or even learning how to do things in general. I blew off school and never learned how to learn until after I finished school because I'm "naturally smart," as everybody I'd fooled told me. Then, in this sorry state, I stumbled onto a realization: I hadn’t failed by grinding League of Legends and never challenging myself. No - I'm oppressed by the cruel system that is capitalism.[^1] And thus I was saved from discovering that I was nothing special. My new comfortable reality was that I just wasn't living my true life due to circumstances entirely outside my control.
The ideology came later, and it came as relief. "I deserve something better than drudgery and job precarity." The explanations involving capitalism and oppression were entirely post-hoc - in exactly the same way that, as @FtttG argues, climate change is a post-hoc rationalization for not wanting kids, for one reason or another.
I've collected several attempts to explain why people become woke or leftist, and none of them ring true to my experience:
These frameworks aren't necessarily wrong for everyone. Let me be clear: I do think earnest leftists exist. I can say with 100% certainty that there's a guy who's into Marxism because he really thinks it's the best economic system anyone ever devised - but that's a sort of special interest for odd people. And there are people who are woke because they have strong care/fairness intuitions, the way Haidt describes. But there's a reason your average anarchist talks first about the injustice of the system, not about the logistics of a post-revolutionary anarchist society. They perceive themselves to have been personally wronged by the system, which is why we need to tear it down. This shift in focus is a perfect defence mechanism against confronting your own failure to flourish. None of the frameworks above capture the main psychological movement. They capture the contents of their beliefs, they describe the behaviour but they completely fail to address the mechanism behind the beliefs.
The Last Psychiatrist (TLP) and Lasch already described all of this (more precisely than I can put in a comment here) and they are much closer than any of the frameworks above, in addition to being hardly unknown in the rationalist circles. I believe they are much closer to generalizing the modern condition, so it's sort of baffling for me that the main societal-level idea of narcissism isn't taken more seriously here - or at least, I'm not seeing its impact. To summarize for those who are skeptical or unfamiliar: TLP's concept of narcissism isn't vanity - counterintuitively, he doesn't use the word in the colloquial sense. In his parlance, it's the protection of a self-image that was never tested against reality. The ideology - whether Marxism, wokeness, or just a vague "the system is broken" sentiment - functions as what TLP would call a defence against change. It's not that these people hold wrong beliefs you need to argue them out of. The beliefs are are better understood as load-bearing walls protecting them from a conclusion: that they are ordinary, that they wasted time, that the life they have might be the life they built through inaction.
My own snapping-out-it wasn't a fully conscious decision. Having kids turned out to be one of my major sources of meaning - just as it was for @gog. But it was really a series of events that made it impossible for me to avoid the conclusion that my life is basically a normal life, and the "true life" I was yearning for doesn't need to be provided by a third party. I must create it myself.
If TLP's and Lasch's diagnosis is right and I think it basically is, then the culture war as it is typically waged - arguing with people about their beliefs, debunking their claims - is largely beside the point. You're not going to argue a narcissist out of a defence mechanism - it's tantamount to trying to convince someone that they are not a good person, because those beliefs are essentially what makes them a good person. So, narcissists' beliefs aren't the disease - they're the symptom and that means the leverage points are the conditions that produce the narcissism in the first place.
So, TLP rarely talks about those conditions directly, but extracting from his posts and my own observations, I'd point to four factors:
If there's a key to winning the culture war, it's not separation from the left - not civil war - as some propose. The key lies in addressing these four conditions, whatever that entails - that is a much more fruitful field for discussion than endlessly pointing out exactly how the leftists/wokies are weird and incorrect and willing to lie and don't get me wrong, they are all of those things and they do lie, but so what? The rationalist and the subsequent The Motte / culture-war milieu established that thousands of times over and we are no better off for it. Clearly defining the cause (or, at least, one of the most important causes) of the culture war is cultural narcissism as defined by TLP and Lasch at least makes it possible to move forward with imagining solutions. Acting on this part specifically will lead to the complete victory even if narcissism is but a one of the overall causes of the social splitting. I'd like to believe that the causes have to be addressable, even if some believe they aren't really. Maybe we don't even know what's missing in our analysis?. Maybe I don't even know what the hell I am talking about when I bring up the collapse of obligation-based identity? But if it's a hard problem (perhaps the hardest) doesn't it deserve more of your attention than endlessly filling the book of grudges?
P.S. This generalizes beyond wokeness or communism. It's more of a "our culture is shaped like this through and through", which is why I'm sort of obsessed with trying to understand how to foster agency in myself and in my kids.
I'll defend the old you. First, you have to wonder, how do you really get that way? You mention a bunch of former-Marxist sounding causes having to do with early childhood and the wheel of historical materialism turning and therefore the collapse of obligation based social relations, but the reality is most people are just born that way. The heritability of narcissism has been estimated to be as high as 77%, similar to other DSM diagnoses like ADHD and schizophrenia. Where do those genes come from? In reality traits exist on a continuum, and psychiatrists label people at the tails. The people at the tails are produced by meiotic recombination. The mean and variance that controls how frequently such people occurred is controlled by evolution. Schizophrenia correlates with creativity, and ADHD with adventurousness and energy, so eradicating the genes for those means getting rid of creative, energetic, and adventurous people. Obviously that's bad. What about narcissism? Well, it correlates with Big 5 disagreeableness. That measures how much truth-to-power someone speaks. Are you willing to offend someone for a greater good or do you cower to their demands? It correlates with leadership. Honestly, every leader must be above average narcissism, I mean how else would they get the idea they should be in that position?
The tail-end concept also leads to the question, what is the opposite of these disorders? What's at the other tail? The answer is apparently some type of autism for schizophrenia, something called sluggish tempo for ADHD, and I think the opposite of narcissism is masochistic personality.
I'm guessing that you don't have diagnosed NPD, so it would be unfair to say you even have pathological, tail-end levels of narcissism. So was your reaction really bad, or was it actually closer to the ideal than some people would like to admit? There's this thing in history called slavery, and many people ended up in it. Most people today think slavery is bad. But what are you if you must work for a man, and you never get to criticize that man, or opt out of working for that man? A slave. And that's bad. Now what are you if you must work for the so-called free market, and you never get to criticize the free market (that's narcissism of course), or opt out of working for that free market (the only way is revolution, which is narcissism)? You are merely a slave to the free market.
So you see, to have liberty, you must have some level of narcissism. People who are too low in narcissism are natural slaves. A natural slave of the free market never criticizes capitalism and never tries to leave it or break free from it. If they get any leisure it's because master said they get a good job.
I think liberty is beautiful and good, and therefore it is true. So it's no coincidence that you call it your true life. A life of slavery is indeed a false life, a life lived for another person, who hates you and sees you only as a source of consumption. They see you like a hamburger. A cow waiting for the slaughter. A farm animal. Not even a beloved pet! Why should you hold back your fury from such a person? But that person is the one who pays you in the free market, not allowing you to live your true life.
The one complication here is that we allegedly still have economic scarcity, and you aren't guaranteed to come out on top if you rip up the Hobbesian peace treaty of mass society and declare yourself free. That's a Spartican war declaration, and your neighbor might crucify you in response. Who can blame them, I mean, what would you do to a fellow narcissist who declared you the system and tried to take your stuff?
The only way out is through. That doesn't mean your old ideas were wrong in spirit, just in detail. Your economics were off. Intellectually, there's some promising ideas like shortening the work week. Is scarcity really still so much that people need to work 40 hours a week for the system, the same as a century ago? Probably not. You're probably getting ripped off. As a narcissist, it's your genetic job to be sensitive to that and to root it out. The natural slaves don't even feel it. What you don't want to do is bury your head in the sand. Eventually somebody will come and pick-pocket you.
You can probably get a 1920s level of existence by going on the dole and working zero hours a week. I mean, better, because you can still post on the motte when you're on the dole. Not a lot of takers though, relatively speaking.
While I agree with the premise that you hardly need to work 40 hours a week for 40 years to maintain at least equal and in most respects significantly superior material conditions than someone from the 1920s, it's impossible to get a 1920's level of existence via welfare or FIRE - living a 1920's life alongside friends, family and potential romantic partners in 1920 is significantly different to voluntarily choosing such a life while all your peers are living in 2026.
In that respect it's hardly the fault of the system, capitalism, or wealth inequality though, but simply the natural consequences of choosing to live like an oddball; at the end of the day most people complain, but their revealed preference is that they'd rather work more to consume more and fit in.
Indeed. The kinds of people complacent enough to be okay living a 1920s existence today are probably pretty contemptible.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You can’t do that, at least in the UK.
You need to provide evidence that you are working full time to apply for jobs, or they’ll cut you off. And you need to be genuinely poor or they’ll tell you to live off your savings.
You can't do it in the US as a single non-elderly man either... unless you commit disability fraud. Which turns out to be ridiculously common.
That's how you do it in the UK too. But I don't think it's trivial, especially if your life history is incompatible. Degree + good job for ten years suggests an ability to live in society, unless you can cite being assaulted or raped or some other trauma. Someone from the underclass who's perfectly able to work if they want to but is belligerent/anxious and has a history of getting sacked because he/she doesn't play well with employers is much more plausible.
People are getting generous PIP for ‘severe anxiety’, something that a single generous psychiatrist (is it time for @self_made_human to do the British would-be-NEETs of TheMotte a favor?) can diagnose you with.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I am sure that many unscrupulous individuals find a way to spend less than forty hours a week looking for a job.
Naturally.
What I'm saying is that it's not a matter of people like you and me looking at zero hours of work but low living standards and opting for the alternative as revealed preference.
I'm saying that option genuinely isn't available unless you're also poor and up for committing fraud, so the lack of middle/upper class takers doesn't tell you much about its desirability.
Well, of course you don't get to take your 2020s level of wealth into the 1920s time machine. That was never part of the deal.
IME a significant portion of the UMC/UC is comfortable with, shall we say, questionable tax practices (dubious business write-offs, under the table nannies, etc). I don't think it's their acute sense of honor that keeps them from doing this.
Since you mentioned the upper class, let's look at this the other way. You can withdraw 40k a year from a 1M principal indefinitely. Certainly you can live better on 40k a year than the median 1920s person, and it won't take decades to save up 1M on a high income especially if you are already practicing for your 1920s lifestyle. Yet basically no high earners do this outside of FIRE weirdos. There's just not that much demand to live like you're in the 1920s. People would rather live in the 2020s and work 40 hours a week.
Who was talking about time machines? You were saying ‘if you’d a low income and lots of free time to make art then go on the dole’ and I was saying that the system doesn’t work like that.
Re: FIRE, you life and mine are different. Even if I paid no tax and had no expenses, it would take considerably more than a decade to get that kind of money.
But that’s not the problem. The problem is that it renders you completely vulnerable, especially now that you’ve also driven yourself to zero net worth to be eligible. Even the people who don’t like their jobs know that going on the dole or claiming disability benefits as a middle class professional will be a door you can never reopen and that obviously affects their decision making.
Again, you seem to be gesturing towards ‘people say they want A but when pressed they don’t take A~ (which is a really shit version of A) so they can’t really mean what they’re saying’.
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