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 -
When people both here and elsewhere say that HBD is true but that society should still treat people as individuals or practice colorblindness, I get really mad. I don't disagree with them, but I still get mad
Because what I want to say in response is that that isn't good enough because your premise was supposed to wrong! The edifice that was used to justify anti-blackness for centuries was supposed to be completely discredited, put into the dustbin of history. You can’t enslave, discriminate, oppress, and demean a people based on the assumption that they’re inferior and then…turn out to be right. That’s not fair!
But I can't express that belief because of how obviously irrational it is. It's a demand for cosmic justice, not a real intellectual rebuttal. Yet I can't help it
This conspiracy theory about an "edifice of anti-blackness" is where you went wrong, IMO.
It never existed. There are always racist people, and there is always an ethnic angle to political conflict. Mostly this doesn't matter too much, because people are not and have never been any bigger on ethnic identity than any other. Racism is not an explanation, but a symptom.
The edifice of modern society based on international capitalism, division of labor and technological advancement is not and has never been anti-black. Black people who ran into it had a variety of outcomes, from slavery to slave trading empires. Every other group on earth did too. The native Americans died mostly of unknown and uncured diseases. The Mughals got overthrown by a beverage company. The Aztecs got overthrown by a local rebellion against their tyrannical rule spearheaded by a few Spaniards. The Aborigines were just....ignored mostly, so dysfunctional they were never an organized threat to anything.
Not every group of people was well selected for this new world. The long-civilized and long broken to the yoke of empire parts of the world tended to do better than more primitive cultures. This isn't a moral reflection on those people, but a recognition of their lesser ability to navigate the sort of complex systems and institutions necessary for a modern society. Civilization is partially genetic, as each society selects over time for those who can follow and prosper under its rules.
Take one aspect as an example. Literacy is one of those things that is not necessary or common in lower civilizations but becomes absolutely essential the more advanced a society is. People from largely illiterate societies by definition have not been genetically selected for whatever genes contribute to literacy. Over hundreds or thousands of years, once they develop a culture of literacy, they will become genetically better at it.
The reason Japan could resist colonization, and China could recover so quickly once they resolved the power struggle is civilizational, by which I mean a mental suitedness to complex society that has become partially genetic. Culture becomes genetic over time. This is why Ashkenazis have high average IQ, but Mizrahi don't.
We see that some cultures developed genetic templates that are superior under the current dispensation. These are not centrally "white" genetically, but tend to come from the heavily selected upper classes of several major genetic groups, all of which have a millennium or three of cultural literacy. Europe, China, Japan, India, the Semitic peoples, etc.
Some cultures developed genetic templates that are not well suited to the current dispensation. These are not centrally "black" although many (all?) black cultures are included. Tribal societies everywhere have struggled, from native Americans to Hmong immigrants post-Vietnam war. The Mongolians are not exactly tearing it up in international finance.
Much of the inequality everyone decries is just the mismatch of genetic templates from more primitive societies being exposed to the modern world. This has changed over time and will continue to change. HBD is a moving target. The future will be written by those cultural institutions that determine our current genetic selection.
A lot of these templates aren’t genetic- Confucianism is really good at learning and implementing superior organizational realities. Islam is definitely not(and Muslims are not majority Arab- this is a missionary religion).
Confucianism is a belief system which the Chinese have been using to select for their elites/mates for several thousand years. Do you really think that has had no genetic effect at the population level? At this point, I would say Confucianism has imprinted itself on the Han genetic code, just as Christianity has the European. A society run more or less under that framework has been executing rebels and criminals as defined by that system for four thousand years.
Islam is an interesting case. It has only ever been successful when married to a militarily dominant ethnic group. The arabs who originated it never had the assabiyya to maintain an empire, and thus it became the tame religion of one after the other of older ethnic groups and newer barbarian tribes (Shia for the Persians, Sunni for the Egyptians, and Turks). Due both to the organizational limitations and the genetic diversity of their adherents, the imprint of Islam is harder to distinguish, but still I think present in the older populations.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link