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 -
To me no; town I would define as a locality that has most of the services needed for day-to-day life, a core that spans a few streets rather than one, but doesn't have the businesses and services that would truly make it independant. A town would have for instance pharmacies, supermarkets, maybe some chain stores like a walmart, a few restaurants, probably a high school, medical clinics but no hospital, no mall, no airport, no nightlife outside of local bars, minimal public transport. I expect people from a town make a trip to a city in a 1-2 hours drive radius a few times a year when they want to go on real "shopping" trip, need to go to a hospital, etc... There usually aren't any higher education institutions in towns either, so the kids often end up having to move when they start studying at that level.
A village, to me, has a handful of businesses, rarely spread on more than one street: a gas station, a local diner, a very small grocery store, maybe an elementary school, maybe a bar or two but everyone there goes to the nearest town in a 15-30 minutes radius for their real actual groceries every week, and to a city as often as the townfolks do.
I would even posit that the the village/town/city distinction is sometimes completely distinct from rural/suburban/urban. There are small cities in my province that exist essentially as service hubs for the surrounding countryside. They are a bit denser than a typical suburb but the economic engine is not the city. One of them, for instance, has a large veterinary hospital, the biggest agricultural school in the province, etc...
Note that the UN definitions place the thresholds for "city" at 50,000 people, "town" at 5000, and "village" at 500. (And my aforementioned "mega-city" starts at 500,000.)
This is even worse, especially in New Jersey, where we've got weird stuff like Metutchen (pop 15,000) entirely surrounded by Edison (pop 110,000). Edison is just dense suburbia.
To clarify, both UN and US definitions operate on density-based "urban areas" rather than on legal boundaries.
Someone made maps for that here. This makes a large part of the NY metro area one enormous city of 14M. Edison is near the bottom left but I can't tell for sure if it's in or out. Might be useful for some purposes but definitely doesn't map to what Americans would consider 'a city'. (Then again, NYC itself doesn't either)
The official UN maps are here (includes basemap with labels) and here (includes per-city information pop-ups). The official US map is here.
It's in, right on the edge.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I prefer the UK system, where the rules are made up and, on the basis of fairness, Wales gets an automatic city for each Jubilee. Unfortunately, they realized they also needed a more sensible taxonomy, which does ruin the fun a bit.
More options
Context Copy link
I get why they would, because other definitions are fuzzy and open to interpretations, even though in practice most people I know can tell which one a place is by looking at what its core looks like.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link