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 -
"Cornell student Austin Franco was doxxed by Jewish business leaders after explaining that he “didn’t want to work for a Jew,” claiming his experiences with Jews were not “pleasant,” after a NYC startup he had applied to reached out to him three times.":
Subsequently:
a literal Trump Admin official announces that he's going to dedicate his life to ensuring this student never works again
the British Daily Mail ran an article calling this random 19 year old an "entitled Cornell student"
FOX ran multiple stories on this kid, with one contributor demanding that his "life be ruined" while another compares being jewish among goys to being a human amongst the Planet of the Apes.
I was told that "woke is dead" but it seems cancel culture is alive and well on the kosher Right. How is one supposed to take any of the clowns seriously attacking "woke leftists" when they act like this? Why is "student doesn't want to work for jews" worthy of being elevated to international news?
Yes, because Franco responded to the post on X.
Franco was outed by then. He created a twitter account for the purpose of replying after he had already been identified.
Is it “doxxing” if you message a Jew on a social media platform under your real name saying you don’t want to work for him because he’s Jewish and he decides to share that with the Jewish community? Thats a very wide definition of doxxing.
Doxxing, classically, would be tracking down the owner of an anonymous account the way that the SPLC and other do and outing the real owner. If John Smith sends an email to a company from johnsmith@gmail.com signed John Smith and the company makes it public that’s not a dox. It might be a violation of privacy, if the email is understood to be in confidence, but that’s a legal question.
Yes it would be. You would also be banned from Twitter under the previous administration. Doxing ain't literally illegal but most "respectable" sites used to have a rule against it. Doxing has only one purpose visiting pain and suffering on some one. Weather you agree it should happen to the right people/people who deserve it is a separate matter.
But that suggests that sharing any communication, even one made completely non-pseudonymously, is doxxing. It obviously isn’t. Receiving a (non-anonymous, signed by them with their full name) letter from someone and publishing it may be rude, depending on its contents or local law it may even be a crime, but it’s not doxxing. Doxxing specifically refers to revealing the identity of a pseudonymous figure.
Lets remind ourselves the context of this comment thread. Some Jewish CEO gets ass mad for being racially rejected, publishes conversation with a rando (literally random, I didn't need to know this kid existed) guy. He didn't need to have any identifyable information about him in that post to make a point. He chose to "shame" this guy for something I don't care should be shame-able.
So it is indeed doxing, and also screw that CEO guy and everyone after him who decided it's their job to punish him.
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