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 -
Because HBDers don't want to eat the whole bullet. If being inferior on some axis is justification for unequal treatment then you might find your gander being sauced when it turns out that your own demographic isn't as high IQ as Jews or next generation chatbots, or as strong and capable as a younger demographic. Men are superior to women? Okay big man, the same thing goes for your own wife and daughter.
Let's look at why HBD is called Human Biological Diversity. The premise of the argument - borrowed from progressives - is that diversity is good, but that blending different cultures/races via mass immigration reduces diversity where they successfully mix and introduces conflict as a result of racial differences where they don't (remember: diversity depends on differences, meaning they can't retreat to colour blindness), and so to maintain the biological diversity of humanity the various genotypes should be kept apart. At it's base its anti-immigration/anti-integration rhetoric, not a racial supremacy theory.
The argument leans on and gestures at a blindspot or element of hypocrisy in the worldview of progressives who will happily support and defend diversity in every other context but clam up when faced with the diversity of human communities where the progressive's own politics are the only acceptable course. It's a convoluted gotcha - "You like diversity, don't you? Well ackshually you're harming the same diversity you claim to defend. Checkmate."
You can make an intellectual rebuttal to HBD by taking it seriously, analysing the means and ends of it, illustrating the implications of applying it consistently across all demographic axes, and contrasting that against the selective applications that HBD fans usually suggest and checking for inconsistencies. I'm not saying that's the perfect rebuttal, I'd hope that others can do better, but it's a start. Getting angry only leads to a "you rage you lose" forfeit.
More options
Context Copy link