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 -
Yet the fundamental problem is that a provably fair metric for this justifies discrimination.
Everyone knows that "scientific X-ism" is starting from the conclusion first and working backwards. What happens when you don't do that and still come up with X overrepresented in the set? (And "couldn't graduate from high school" is a stronger signal than the traditional examples of race or sex. Scientific credentialism, perhaps.)
Hence the answer of "never ask that question, also sacrifice the time and potential of people who can graduate in such a way that sufficiently soothes society's guilty conscience about discriminating against the failures".[1]
Which means that there's a tendency to make society feel guiltier about that- that as society perceives itself as even richer, more sacrifice should be demanded from everyone to get over the fact that some people are better than others.
(Example: in 2020, American society got an absurdly generous stimulus package (of both money directly, but also of time, as it was illegal to work. Within 3 months, in every major city, protests broke out with the goal of increasing the amount of sacrifice to compensate for the existence of social malignants. That's what the cries of "Black Lives Matter" ultimately mean.[2])
Assume the above is true, and take the view that high school and college are just one very long IQ test. Those 12-14 years [so basically, most of a productive person's youth] taking the test are ultimately forfeit[3]. That level of sacrifice is required- a tax, if you will- paid to the societal consensus.
In return, that consensus will commit violence against socially malignant persons older than that (who "were given every chance and now deserve the outcome of prison or death"). In other words, past the age the youth have sacrificed for this protection, we no longer pretend a malignant person "could have been a future doctor or lawyer" no matter how many [crocodile] tears are shed.
Asian countries do this too, but to a far greater extent to the point that men and women who fail tend to kill themselves. This is because by failing, they're permanently demoted into the class against whom all of society, including themselves, agrees discrimination is warranted. (If they didn't believe this, they wouldn't be taking the honorable way out- that's why that type of suicide is "the honorable way out" in the first place.[4])
[1] These human beings are, in a fundamental sense, bad harvests. Ancient peoples made many sacrifices [including perfectly good human beings directly] to prevent bad harvests, but the purpose was more likely for any member of society to be able to ease their consciences and understand they did all they could if the harvest was bad anyway. (When the bad harvest is a human being, the moment that human's life ends in imprisonment or death does not qualify as being sacrificed. Actively having chosen to be an opponent precludes this from being a sacrifice.)
[2] The term "omnicause" describes this effect in the general case, but is also designed to destroy any other local system of sacrifice by insisting upon the primacy of typical American blood feuds like racism, sexism, anti-/semitism (depends on the day), etc.
[3] It is no different than any other child sacrifice. Yes, the one being sacrificed survives, but they have sustained very serious injury for no other reason than the religion of the people demanding it. Sacrificing babies to Moloch for a good harvest has the approval of everyone...
[4] ...including the child who will be incinerated. The holiest children play their part.
More options
Context Copy link