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 -
You once again failed to support that. You cited a case where there was a conviction in another jurisdiction. You failed to cite a single case where one jurisdiction effectively (ie indirectly) adjudicates a crime in another jurisdiction.
Second screw your condescending attitude. I noted early on the exact novelty you “based on your reading.” I then expanded it to include some reasons why it is difficult here, especially in criminal federal context.
Third, many commentators have noted the campaign finance law is unclear and under developed. I don’t practice in that area but am relying on them.
Fourth, you likely messed up your legal analysis. They can’t enter a misdemeanor conviction because that statute likely has tolled.
I’m doing speaking with you in perpetuity however.
And you have failed to cite any authority at all for anything, least of all that "indirect adjudicating" is even a thing, let alone that it is an exception to the fact that courts interpret the laws of foreign jurisdictions ALL THE TIME. If you think there is a an exception to the general rule, then it is incumbent upon you to provide authority.
No, you made unsupported claims to that effect.
Run, not tolled. Tolled means the opposite.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link