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 -
How about total price stays the same, because unlike the imaginary vaccine or the nonexistent more efficiently produced anti-retrovirals that's what we actually have, and the group that gets to pay for them is the group that actually benefits from them, or those who volunteer to foot the bill? As opposed to forcing everyone to cover for the few?
Letting the actual beneficiaries pay seems like the simple, fair and transparent thing to do.
A lot of them can't afford it. The cost of PrEP divided by the population is a smaller figure than the cost divided by the number of people who need it; removing from the denominator those who cannot afford the larger expense will place it beyond even more people. Iterate enough times, and we end up with PrEP being accessible only to the likes of Peter Thiel, which I think is a worse outcome than you having a higher tax bill.
We expect people who chose not to have children to contribute financially to the cost of primary and secondary education; the same principle applies here.
No. You expect that, and most states do enforce the principle, but I do not share that expectation and I do not endorse the principle.
Well that's tragic then. Almost as bad as the scenario in which all of society is forced to labor for the creation of a pharmaceutical product that only a small minority of people need, who themselves are either unable or unwilling to bear that burden themselves and/or with the assistance of their well-wishers. Having states force everyone to contribute to the upkeep of an expensive minority, damn the costs and the fairness and the individual responsibility, is not in my view the better outcome.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link