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 -
Why doesn't "what if the roles were reversed" ever work? I mean it works for me. I actually am convinced when people bring up that argument. But it never works when conservatives say it to progressives.
Why I'm bringing this up is that recently Abdul El-Sayed's wife appeared on stage wearing something not dissimilar to an outfit from "Handmaid's Tale".
https://x.com/FedPoasting/status/2118389760070725932
What if the roles were reversed? What if Mike Pence or Mitt Romney or J.D. Vance of Pete Hegseth showed up like this?
I have a hard time explaining why this line of reasoning just does not land at all with progressives. To me it seems like a slam dunk. What am I missing? And is there a conservative equivalent to this, i.e. a meta role reversal where conservatives are the one being hypocrites?
Because white progressives are unironically white supremacists. I don’t mean this in the DR3 way. They don’t think these people are a threat at all. A white person doing something a tenth as conservative would be seen as way scarier to them. White supremacists and immigration restrictionists actually see the threat these people pose and give them their due. It’s why they also don’t care about DEI and support it. They think they are so smart and privileged that it won’t affect them. They have no idea they will be discarded as soon as they don’t need them.
I often joke about who the real white supremacists are. The people we call "white supremacists" believe that whites should be supreme but are actually oppressed and downtrodden. Meanwhile the most vehement progressives essentially believe that whites should be oppressed but are actually supreme and unassailable. For example, in the latter case it's literally impossible to be racist towards whites because of their actual supremacy in all things no matter what. It's very much like the German Jew reading the Nazi newspapers for all thee good news about Jews running the world. The average white supremacist could only hope that whites were actually as supreme as the progressive implies.
I always find the comments like this interesting because they do seem to show that the woke progressive and the white supremacist share a very similar worldview. When this is pointed out it's usually to criticise the progressive ("don't you realise how racist your position is?"), but the same also applies in reverse, where I'm inclined to say to the white supremacist, "don't you realise how progressive you are?"
The funny part is that both sides can accuse the other of a hypocrisy while ignoring the fact that their own position entails the same hypocrisy.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link