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 -
Meanwhile, (in) famous Australian xitter activist Drew Pavlou calls billionaires to (cultural) battle.
TL;DR: You big moneybags have nowhere to run and nowhere to hide, do not waste your money on some farcical "charter cities" or "network states", spend them on activists like Drew.
The Red Cavalry is on the horizon, this is now or never!
We need more ... think tanks!
Centi-millionaire/billionaire activism driven by money alone had been debated here previously, and the record is not encouraging.
If the situation is really so dire as Drew believes, if fate of Western civilization hangs in the balance, if Mamdani is really new Lenin ready to set the Earth aflame, something more than policy papers is needed, but what?
Any better ideas and suggestions from Mottizen elite human capital? Not castle in the sky plans and fantasies, but something that humble billionaire can do alone or with few friends.
edit: links linked
Have a chat with some of your peers to stop acting like weirdos in public.
Unironically, the best thing billionaires as a class could do for their political reputations:
a) stay out of public sight, and in particular stay out of public politics. You don't even need to actually stay out of politics, just minimize the degree to which you are seen to be involving yourself. There's basically no way to not be seen as a corrupting influence on politics (because you inherently are), so the next best thing is to not be seen. Don't engage in conspicuous consumption (like, say, renting Venice for your wedding), don't try to make yourself a celebrity, don't promote yourself as a political player, etc...
b) set themselves up as Patrons of Humanity rather a jealous and superior species that needs to protect itself from the unwashed masses (this seems to be a problem really specific to tech billionaires). Do your best to look like you are Giving Back. You don't even need to be effective about it. In fact, you probably shouldn't, because the effective thing to do would be to focus on humanitarian aid in developing countries, whereas you need to be concerned with the electorates of the countries you actually live and do business in.
Compare/contrast the level of hate directed at Rob Walton vs Rupert Murdoch. They're both right-wing billionaires and Walton is dramatically wealthier than Murdoch, but Walton doesn't seek out the spotlight whereas Murdoch has actively positioned himself as a kingmaker and propagandist-in-chief.
The one billionaire who is very clearly a "patron of humanity" is the one most widely hated by the left.
If you're talking about Musk, you have that backwards. Musk has almost completely avoided the traditional philanthropic noblesse oblige of the extremely wealthy while being publicly self-aggrandizing.
I assume that the other commenter's implication is that SpaceX and Starlink have improved humanity's situation more than "philanthropy".
I grasped that. They're missing the point, if so. Like it or not, you don't get much credit for pro-social behavior that is also to your direct profit. The point is to be visibly philanthropic (or at least invisible) so people don't think you're a Bond villain.
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