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 -
Kazimierz Dąbrowski's book on the labor camps of Germany, as cited in the Christianity on the Spectrum podcast, emphasized the dichotomy of the ongoing war between slaves and free men, those who have choices they can effect upon others and those who have no power to leave off working; that the poets and academics stand upon the backs of slaves to have their platforms.
This leads me to the idea that the elite class, middle class, and labor class are three qualitatively different ways to live:
The middle class must also live with the negative consequences of the choices of all others, and the laborers must live with the negative consequences of the middle class and other laborers. The elites have to deal with each others' decisions, but escape the negative consequences of the rest.
I find it important to note Dąbrowski's category of "free men" conflates the elite and the middle class. The middle class only exist in capitalism, in meritocracy. Meanwhile, socialism elevates some laborers to elites by making the middle class laborers through taxation, and Communism's pre-paradise stage elevates some laborers to elites by making all others laborers through confiscation and murder.
A functional society has more middle class, but if your society becomes so by turning another into laborers, you have become global elites. It's easy to mistake hard-working middle class for laborers, but to see the real difference, check my definitions. Note I'm not saying there's a hard-and-fast line; the middle class are those who get the bulk of positive benefits and negative consequences of their own choices.
At first blush this sounds like you're describing class mobility. In a society with high class mobility, a laborer who makes good decisions will receive that benefit and has the potential to rise, and likewise an elite who makes poor decisions will faces the consequences and fall. Societies with low class mobility prevent consequences for elites and offer limited opportunities to laborers. Likewise, a larger middle class implies higher class mobility.
The war between slaves and free men only takes place when there's an actual distinction, a wall between the two groups that can't be climbed. That's why we haven't had class war in the US. But with the younger generation rejecting the American mythology of class mobility, that war is looking more likely.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link