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 -
Very meagre for a top-level comment, I know, but I felt it was worth sharing because it's peak culture war: it turns out the sole holdout in the Lindsay Clancy case was a Black man.
(For those living under a rock: Lindsay Clancy was the woman who killed her three young children, pleaded non guilty on the basis that she suffered from post partum psychosis, and the murder trial ended in a mistrial because only 1 out of 12 jury member found her guilty.)
I think this revelation will end the debate about whether the jury failed to reach the right verdict. Although ostensibly the discussion revolved around what level of proof was provided (Massachussets has an unusually low bar for insanity defenses, in that the prosecutor must prove that the defendant was capable of discerning right from wrong beyond reasonable doubt, rather than the defense proving their client was incapable at least to the level of preponderance of evidence, as is the case in most jurisdictions.)
In practice, the issue seemed to be mostly framed in terms of identity politics, along the lines of “mistrial caused by obstinate man who refused to listen to reasonable majority of mostly women”. Substitute “black man” and “white women” and this loses its cachet: suddenly it reads like a proud person of color bravely standing up against a group of Karens trying to browbeat him into submission.
The situation continues to develop and the dynamics are interesting. The mainstream media line seems contrary to your predictions. In short, NBC investigations report he is no angel:
Whatever the broader issues are, rent delinquents should be shot.
Aren’t we supposed to not dox jurors?
He’s a terrible person with bad judgement, but is it surprising those people end up on juries? Lindsay Clancy will almost certainly not be convicted as would happen without this man, and for convictions the system still seems to work: The US has the 5th highest incarceration rate, under El Salvador, Cuba, Rwanda, and Turkmenistan. Obviously the US needs crime reform but in enforcement, changing trials won’t fix the main problem of low-level nuisances because they’re not getting arrested in the first place.
I know norms and systems are falling apart, and I don’t expect this one instance to affect much, but breaking them without any clear reason, I have a gut feeling it’s bad for everyone in the long run (except this guy, he’ll get a GoFundMe or podcast).
Then put the booking station in the middle of nowhere, ideally in the places where it's illegal for anyone but the government to build. (Employees work 2 weeks in, 2 weeks out.)
Oh, what's that, Madame Prosecutor, the interests of justice require he not be charged? Oh, what a shock, better luck next time- you're free to go then. The public transportation back to your city runs once, on the second week of the month. The bus is free. It's 3 hours, one way, due to the length of the route and budgetary restrictions.
Naturally, if you're going to take that transport, our bus stop is very well-stocked. There are rooms with cots for rest, and along with the food, they are free until the next bus leaves. It's well-maintained by transit staff and secured by transit police.
If you're going to have a revolving door the least you could do is make it actually inconvenient. Perhaps somewhere you aren't legally prohibited from leaving, but unless you have someone from your place of residence that can vouch for you (and is willing to drive 6 hours to retrieve you), you are now in a state that is legally, but not meaningfully, indistinguishable from exile. Your "bail" is now collected by physics (the money/time/effort it takes to retrieve you).
Issues with this being a political prison are avoided simply because it's not actually a prison (the prison is coincidentally right next door to house those the prosecutor will charge, and this branch of public transit has a convenient labor-sharing agreement with them). You can just straight up go and visit if you wanted to audit the place, as it's public. (No overnight parking or camping, though.)
If you have someone who will help you, you'll be back home very quickly; I figure that the more people you can call on who are willing and able to help you in this way, the less of an anti-social element you were. You'll wear them out quickly with repeated use if you're truly an asshole anyway.
It's all very reasonable, safe, and consensual... while at the same time just being the modern version of transportation-as-punishment, and maximally frustrating external efforts to defeat this purpose. (It's true that, for example, George Soros has the power to simply send every criminal an Uber or fund busses of his own, but now he'll have to fund more than just the prosecutor to do that.)
Your proposal works as well on the actually innocent as it does on the criminals released because the prosecutor likes certain sorts criminals, and for that reason among many others there is absolutely now way it would fly in the courts.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link