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 -
While I see what you're getting at, this seems to introduce the same perverse incentives as two-tier policing in the UK.
It's essentially saying: if you're meek and sensitive to your burden on society and respond rationally to incentives, the state should bring the hammer down every time you are inconvenient. If you're blindly stubborn, aggressive, and refuse to change what you're doing however much suffering it causes, then society should smile and figure out how to tolerate you and put loads of resources behind supporting you.
I think the framing is incorrect here. People in general are not rational, so Group 1 is almost certainly not responding to rational incentives, it is responding to the socialization and social pressures that can approximate rational behaviour and have evolved over time based upon certain situations and conditions.
But yes from a public health perspective what matters is what people do, not some world where you wish people would be more rational. Most people should eat fewer empty cheap calories. We seem entirely incapable of doing that. So public health messaging and resources should be allocated accordingly. The people you have not the people you wish you had.
As for Group 2 in your example, well arguably their socialized set of behaviours is indeed working. Group 2 is just as much a part of society as Group 1. They are under no obligation to bow to Group 1's preferences if they are not forced to do so. That's what a culture war is for. To determine whose cultural mores and preferences are dominant.
But in the meantime those at the cutting edge must work with the resources they have.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link