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 -
Yes, because it's an easy thing to catch if it's happening for a number of factors.
Someone who tried getting caught so easily is evidence of how easy it is to catch, even a very small scale attempt has the people she paid willing to rat her out.
How do you know they got caught easily, rather than it being a fluke due to abnormal incompetence? Do you find nothing odd about the smooth transition from lack of examples of it happening being proof that you're right to an example of it happening being proof that you're right?
By other logistical measures and analysis.
We could say the same thing about the moon landing or 9/11 attacks. The US has engaged in multiple coverups before, so it's not impossible that those are fake. But just like how the moon landing requires a ton of people with little incentive to lie (or even counter incentive like rival nations) to all coordinate together on the coverup, a widespread voter fraud scheme like what is alleged requires a lot of people to help the coverup without the incentives or motivation to do it.
If the moon landing was fake, we need to explain why the USSR didn't call it out. If 9/11 was fake, then we need to explain why all the middle eastern countries didn't try to expose it. If there's a large mass of fake votes being done among registered homeless, we need to explain why these homeless are willing to engage in the coverup and lie and say they actually voted. The theory might still be true, but it must also be even grander than what is currently alleged.
What evidence we do have, a random woman trying to do a small scale plot, suggests that they are not willing to lie and will expose voter fraud.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link