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 -
I think it's a little broader than that, in that it's not just social security. Younger people work more, are more economically productive, and so on. Older people are more likely to be retired and consumers. The net result is a society in some amount of decline. But I agree that that wouldn't necessarily be any disastrous thing to worry about, there is no chance of extinction or something due to this.
It may also reverse itself to some extent, since now that birth control exists, wanting kids plays a much bigger role than it used to, rather than wanting sex, and so there should be an increase over time in people who want kids, if that's at all genetic. (Or if not, I would think that the effect of generations being disproportionately raised by people who value children would itself have some amount of effect. Religiosity could also matter, since more religious families tend to have more children.) Since the loss of children in large part from people delaying and not wanting children, that would provide a check on that.
I'm curious as to what this will do for future generations politically and religiously. I think in general, the right in the US is more pronatalist than the left, which could shift what demographics look like a generation from now back rightward, unless the zeitgeist proves a large enough influence (which, given what Gen Z looks like politically, is very plausible).
Edit: This is all assuming that the way society works stays relatively similar to now, which, given the recent AI progress, could plausibly not be the case.
Religiosity is also hereditary, so I'd expect selection for religiosity to be a major factor. It's probably worth checking to see if elementary school teachers, scoutmasters, and the like have more kids, or are related to people with more kids on average, although I have no idea how you'd go about doing that.
I do think rural areas of France are probably a thing to watch, because their fertility transition happened long enough ago that it could feasibly have some mild selection effects by now and I think that small towns haven't been replaced by Arabs yet. Again, not sure how to check- try to correlate desired fertility with TFR in 1840?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link