site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 27, 2023

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.

11
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

The State is enforcing a State law against false accounting. Some possible motives upgrade false accounting, under State law, from a misdemeanor to a felony. One of those is facilitating a federal crime.

There are lots of laws like this, and they don't cause jurisdictional issues - they sometimes cause practical problems because of the need to resolve a technical point of the law of jurisdiction A in the courts of jurisdiction B, but in a federal system like the US that is also something that happens all the time and processes exist to deal with it.

There can even be laws where the predicate crime is a violation of foreign law. I don't know about US examples, but for example the UK has a crime of "Failure to prevent facilitation of foreign tax avoidance offences" where the predicate crime is a violation of foreign revenue law.

In those cases, I understand generally the predicate crime was adjudicated.

It is quite odd for example to say there was a crime in Jurisdiction A that was uncharged. However, Jurisdiction B is going to effectively pretend that crime occurred (not exactly what is happening here but not too far off).

Note that sometimes one forum depends on another forum to interpret that other forum’s law (ie advisory opinion). Federal courts are the appropriate forum for campaign finance law but as an Art III matter federal courts cannot provide that advisory opinion.

Can you provide one case where something like what NYS is doing occurred? If not, can you stop saying this isn’t abnormal. If you can provide the case, I’ll admit to being wrong.