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, it'd be in trouble because half its adherents would become, to borrow your phrase, charcoal briquettes.
If law and order disintegrated, lots of the survivors would then get shot.
The relevance of impeachment (in scenarios in which the USA doesn't fail, which are quite likely) is that if unlocked (which it likely would be due to the aforementioned charcoal briquettes being unable to vote) it allows a total purge of the judiciary and major purge of the civil service, because of how hilariously open-ended it is (Congress doesn't have to spend weeks on each case; 900 cases in a day is totally legal!). That turns a major defeat into a total rout.
I guess my read is that the incineration/large-scale shooting parts totally eclipse the parliamentary maneuvers parts. At that point, if some SJ partisan found a genie and wished for total control of congress and the judiciary, I don't think it would make a difference. The system's inertia would be gone, people are not going to listen to laws or judges they don't like any more, there's not even relative peace and plenty to keep people complacent. I'm quite sure there would be very radical things happening in whatever ad-hoc legislature the continuity of government machinery spat out, but I'm skeptical the outputs would matter much.
I'm skeptical that laws and courts, as such, actually mean that much. They are valuable because they are coordination mechanisms, but the point is the coordination, not the mechanism, and people observably can coordinate in a lot of other ways. In a serious disruption of the existing social order, I think all this stuff just goes away, as it's too misaligned with the interests of people acting in crisis mode, regardless of tribal affiliation.
Reasonable points.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link