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 -
I would like to discuss the recent road rage incident which took place on the Manhattan ramp to the outbound George Washington Bridge.
Evidently what happened was (1) there were two totally unrelated men both driving home at the end of the day; (2) The alleged shooter was a 62 year old retired NYPD detective named Victor Romero; (3) the victim was an off duty Con Ed worker named Koran Irvine; (4) the two had some sort of dispute over a lane change which didn't work out; and (5) Romero (allegedly) opened fire against Irving, killing him with a shot to the neck.
(I should mention that traffic in that area is almost always rather intense, drivers tend to be aggressive, and it's pretty common for people to end up in situations where they are honking their horns, yelling at each other, etc.)
In any event, based on photographs it appears that Koran Irvine was black. I haven't seen his picture, but I would guess with high probability that the (alleged) shooter is white based on his name. (The NYC area has lots of white guys with Italian-American sounding names.)
Anyway, what's interesting to me is that New York County has a Soros-style DA, Alvin Bragg. So it seems like this is a mouthwatering opportunity for him to throw the book at a white guy for shooting and killing a black guy. Especially since the black guy seems like a sympathetic victim (he apparently has a full time job and is married with children). And yet I read that the charges against Romero have already been reduced from murder to manslaughter and that he's out on bail.
What's going on here? Is my theory of mind about Alvin Bragg off the mark?
ETA: By the way, I am not familiar with the New York law of homicide, but I am aware that in general there is a principle called the "depraved heart" doctrine. The idea is that some acts are so reckless that they will imply the necessary intent for murder even in the absence of premeditation or deliberation. The classic example of this is discharging a firearm into a building which is known by the shooter to be occupied. So it seems like there is a basis here to charge the (alleged) shooter with murder even if it was just a spontaneous road rage incident.
Maybe he’s just generally soft on crime, and race Marxism isn’t an exception to that?
Well there was a situation a year or so ago where an angry black thug attacked and got killed by a bodega worker and the bodega worker was charged with murder, basically because he had defended himself with a knife. In that case the charges were reduced (or perhaps even dropped) in response to public outcry, but I definitely got the sense that like most Leftists, Bragg sees blacks as sacred. So I would have thought that his office would jump on the chance to pile on charges against a white who has (allegedly) killed a black person.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link