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 -
Next you'll be telling me Sicilians, or the Irish, are white too.
"White" has only recently been understood to refer to skin color rather than certain ancestral clusters and the psychological traits associated with them.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_European_marriage_pattern
Slavs definitely would not qualify.
"White" as a political category in the United States has always been understood to refer to all people of 100% European ancestry - the edge cases were and are Middle Eastern/North African. Nobody suggested that guineas, polacks or micks were anything other than white when applying the Founding-era laws restricting citizenship to free whites, or Jim Crow laws segregating "Whites" and "Blacks". What changed was that the ethnic group American nativists considered ingroup changed from "WASPs" to "Whites" (and now to "Heritage-Americans", which is at least supposed to include ADOS blacks and American Indians). The 2nd Klan and the popular nativist movement it was the pointy end of used anti-Catholicism and not racism as their prejudice of choice, and the 1924 Johnson-Reed Immigration Act was explicitly targetted at reducing immigration of undesirable white subgroups.
More options
Context Copy link
Reading the article I am overjoyed to learn that St. Petersburg is not a slavic city.
More options
Context Copy link
"White" referred to certain ancestral clusters, but the Irish were definitely always included. And the Sicilians, at least in the US (the other Italians might disagree). Certainly Slavs are included. Unless you take Ben Franklin's definition, and honestly I can't tell if he was trolling.
The Hajnal line is not about whiteness.
I think that is why forms have the ethnicity category for white latins vs non-white latins. /sarcasm
One of my favorite scenes from the show community: https://youtube.com/watch?v=15QFAppht5o
"sweedish dogs! your blood is tainted by generations of race mixing with lap-landers. you're basically finns."
There was an original American conception of the importance of Englishmen. But I feel that quickly changed. When the Hessian soldiers were captured there was a specific and intentional decision to treat them as victims of their over-bearing monarchs/princes, and give them the opportunity of a free life in America. The religious divide was considered far more important at the time than any racial divide, and Americans were fully willing to make concessions on religious tolerance. They even let Maryland in.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link