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 -
What is the essence of Left and Right to you? I'm having trouble making sense of your model.
To me, political Left and Right, to the degree that they represent something coherent that can be applied across different historical contexts, are something like hierarchy (Right) vs. egalitarianism (Left). You could think of this in terms of their differing stances towards hierarchy, where the extreme rightist says that a hierarchy is good by virtue of its very existence, the extreme leftist says no hierarchy is good, it is always suspect and corrupt and should be abolished. The golden mean / enlightened centrist take on this spectrum is something like, "Hierarchies are inevitable, but we need hierarchies based on competence and virtue that have checks against oppression and corruption" (though the awareness of the inevitability of hierarchy is probably seen as somewhat Right wing in our Post-WWII narrative context).
Individualism (the classical liberalism you describe) vs. Communalism represents a separate political axis. Communists and Fascists are both communalists, but one represents the Left and the other the Right. Likewise, classically liberal individualism can totally work for someone who appreciates hierarchy. It allows the great to differentiate themselves. Elite Human Capital types are Right wing individualists.
I like using my own slightly idiosyncratic definitions for things.
The definitions collide and contradict, a bit, such that an egalitarian leftist could be "rightist", but I don't mind it. Especially when you see tons of rightists demanding egalitarianism, albeit for solely their tribe/kind/ethnic group.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link