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 -
The Supreme Court has issued a ruling on Trump v. Barbara (birthright citizenship). 6-3 striking down Trump's executive order. You can find the ruling here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-365_4hdj.pdf
I've only had enough time to skim the ruling thus far. Jackson wrote a concurrence which I won't bother to read because she's the second most retarded member of the court (Sotomayor still reigns supreme in retardation). Kavanaugh partially concurred on the basis that this needed to be done by act of congress as opposed to executive order, but otherwise generally agreed with the Trump admin's interpretation of the 14th amendment. Thomas and Gorsuch outright dissented. Alito had his own separate dissent. Thomas's opinion includes several historical examples of people born on US soil to people not lawfully in the US who were denied citizenship, and I was not aware of these examples previously, making his the most interesting. Well that and the fact that it agrees with my 100% objectively correct and indisputable view of the matter of course.
This is roughly how most court-watchers expected this decision to turn out, but it still doesn't change the immense disappointment I feel over this news. Someone here earlier this week or last week said that this decision will be our generation's Dred Scott regardless of how it is decided, and that it will tear the union apart in similar fashion. Demographic changes in the West generally are leading to ever increasing tension and dysfunction, and I fear this decision will ensure that a breaking point is reached soooner, rather than later.
The meltdowns in response to the ruling have been pretty incredible, looking at a lot of comments on X would have you believe that the SC just decided to institute birthright citizenship today, instead of them just not changing the law of the land precedent of >150 years. No one alive knows a US without birthright citizenship.
If it's so damaging, why are we one of the wealthiest and most powerful nations not just in the world but in history? Even if you're a pessimistic doomer who can't appreciate the country today because you've gone too fast on the hedonic treadmill and who thinks the 90s or the 60s or the roaring 20s or whatever were Peak America, those times were also under birthright citizenship.
Conservatives even considered it a point of pride! Here's the great Ronald Reagan on immigration https://www.reaganlibrary.gov/archives/speech/remarks-presentation-ceremony-presidential-medal-freedom-5
But modern "conservativism" isn't conservative. It's a corrupted cult of personality based around grievance politics, and racial grievance politics is just a subcategory of that. If modern "conservatives" had any balls left, they would rise against the welfare state they think is attracting parasites, and not against stuff like H1B visas, scientists, engineers, and other great additions to the country. It's not very complicated
Micheal Tracey even made a great point about how victimhood complexes have consumed these "conservatives" so much that they've even largely stopped caring about abortion.
Where are you seeing these "meltdowns"? I've seen a lot of grumbling about Roberts being a coward (making this a day ending in 'y') and mockery of Jackson but nobody on the right that I've seen seems to be particularly surprised by this outcome. Pretty much everyone I know was expecting a 7-2 decision with Thomas and Alito in dissent. If anything the fact that we got Kavanaugh and Gorsuch at least nominally on side with the option for future legislation left open feels like a reason for cautious optimism. We may not have scored, but we did move the ball downfield.
Sean Davis, CEO of the federalist, among many other crazy ideas suggested the dissolution of the union and forced sterilization of all tourists which is definitely the biggest meltdown I've seen. But there's been others. Micheal Tracey points out the issue here
Link? If your characterization is accurate I would acknowledge that as warranting a sincere "WTF Dude?" but most of the responses that I've been seeing have been more like this one. You can dismiss it as "cope" if you like, but I don't think Pinsker is entirely wrong.
Time will tell.
From here:
I don't think Tracey's summary is accurate -- which shouldn't be a surprise, given Tracey's general behavior in other contexts -- and this is pretty explicitly a parade of horribles rather than a real proposal, but I don't think Davis is being particularly healthy as a response, either.
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