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 -
no see my addendum post. my point is the messaging strategy, not the object debate.
This is not a good party line to justify a shifted focus from domestic policy to Iran. sorry. that's my point.
"too bad" is a retarded way to talk to your base.
If a party rose up and promised to put boomers in the golag and give their houses to families raising children, and I voted for them, and you ask me why, the answer is, when I told you I couldnt afford a house to fit my family on a director level salary, you told me 'too bad'.
Housing, healthcare, and education costs are real things to complain about. For Catholic k-12 education specifically prices have risen because bishops no longer wish to subsidize it, despite the many downstream effects of not doing so, but higher education, healthcare, and housing are all multivariate problems which are expensive because no one in positions of influence really cares about keeping costs down. That's reasonable to complain about and seek policy changes over.
Rising food costs are not real, however. Grocery inflation is much slower than wage growth. What drives rising food costs is poor spending discipline- doordash is certainly the most visible example, but ordinary families didn't use to eat steak very often and Americans now think it's unhealthy to eat carbs.
More options
Context Copy link
Okay, fine, but that is also why people are voting for the DSA. Like you, their anger may be understandable but their reasoning is, as you put it, retarded. Maybe your base does need better messaging (the Dems certainly do) but it's not surprising you're getting tripped up by people pointing out that the things you claim are, uh, not necessarily true.
I'd prefer people engage with facts rather than demanding their anger and resentment be given a populist head-pat.
If you're paying attention to the twitter kerfuffle, this isn't an ask for a populist head pat. There are specific asks.
Stop it with Iran. Deport more people. Stop it with H1Bs. Stop having high level official GOP politicians make sneaky amnesty pitches. Pass the save act.
You can disagree with whether those solutions will actually help. But it's being evaded by the um, ackshully burritos are only 14.59 in my area, and how dare you poors eat them anyway. IRAN CAN'T HAVE NUKES!
The burrito debate is also the propositional nation debate is also the Iran debate is also whether MAGA is America First or controlled opposition + foreign adventures.
Tell me if I'm getting the argument here:
You feel your life is worse than your father's.
When people argue your beliefs are factually incorrect, you say its about "the messaging strategy, not the object debate."
Based on your feelings (which need not be true at the object level), you believe you are entitled to submit a list of "specific asks" to someone (?) who is for some reason obligated to implement them.
Can you flesh out the last part?
My life is great. I suffer affordability gap between being able to achieve certain goals, which I benchmark as attainable in the previous generation. My father's life is a good personal benchmark of change because I live a very similar one.
This isn't a factually disputable point. What's disputable is how much it generalizes to the American population. The messaging strategy bit is a reconizable pattern of dismissiveness from within a single party coalition to it's base.
#3 is just you pretending not to understand basical political parties and acting confused. The point is not about 'entitlement'. It's about people voting for things they want. There is a current debate within the republican party about whether we've lost focus on key domestic issues, especially in reference to the war in Iran. That's the frame for this entire burrito conversation.
"It's amazing how much
leftistneocon discourse is just them pretending not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible."More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Well, no argument here that MAGA messaging sucks. But you know the phenomenon of all those Bernie bros who turned Trumpers? I think it not unlikely a lot of burrito MAGAs will turn into DSAers.
The fact that you initiated this as you being angry that you think your father had it better than you is why people are debating that. You did a poor job of framing this about whether or not your party is appealing to its base.
Yes, I did a poor job framing. My frame was intended to be - 'no need to debate whether burritos are actually $20.' There are real domestic policy grievances, and for example, I can look at an objective disparity in housing affordability in my own life, which is a particularly important issue for me personally. My personal anecdote was as I said, 'my burrito'. yeah yeah yeah, statistics away the actual cost of burritos. Nobody can statistics away my ability to compare housing affordability with my father's who makes an especially good control of the change and how it affects me personall.
Everyone can point to specific issues that their feel are not being addressed by the current domestic policy, and dismissing them as fake or not important is bad coalition building.
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