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 -
Objectively, he hobnobbed with some incredibly smart people, some of whom openly considered him a friend.
I consider that Bayesian evidence against him being stupid, despite his lack of credentials.
Either way, those smart people had some reason to be around him, and he probably could have gotten some advice from them to further his own goals, so this doesn't really change my read.
My model of the situation doesn't have him as the genius mastermind, anyway.
In terms of his general intelligence, I concur. It was at least top 10% in the nation, which is hard to call stupid. Nonetheless, it was foolish. Considering he stopped what he was doing I think he must have realized it eventually. As for the later arrest, old people decline and regardless tend to stay stuck in the past. He still modeled the US government like it was a reasonable and fair entity, as worked in 2008 and before. He was not ahead of the curve with updating to it being more of a USSR-style tyranny where nearly every sentence is close to life unless you're a common criminal, and deals can't be trusted because they won't be honored. Which is exactly what happened to him. In a very USSR style way, the state threw out their deal to not prosecute over the events before 2008 and only in jail did he realize it would be like being shipped off to Siberia, not like facing a fair trial with a humane, 8th amendment respecting sentence.
I don't know how many arrests will have to be made for fake «very serious» crimes that were most definitely not very serious 50 years ago will have to be made, based on witnesses that are testifying about events from so long ago that under a reasonable statute of limitations it would be inadmissible, who are also getting paid or looking to make money from lucrative parallel lawsuits, until people with superior options and exposure to this kind of thing flee like it's East Germany and start hanging out wherever else, non-Anglo Europe mostly, maybe Dubai and adjacent places. Andrew Tate is a recent example. He reasoned with Romania, he will likely not reason with the UK, to whom he was shipped to by «United States federal law enforcement» for «very serious» crimes. And if he does, should he come back to the US, that will be his last mistake, because a sealed federal indictment (very Soviet of the United States) will be waiting for him and one day he will disappear into federal prison never to come back out.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link