site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 10, 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.

14
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I agree that working in physical environments is better for overall mental health. Ideally we can just create more drugs like Semaglutide to avoid needing surgical interventions, but I am very much of the belief that there will be a massive biological revolution once AI tools scale into pharma companies.

If there's a big surplus of new capital due to AI efficiency, that means that there is more to invest in things that AI can't do right now, like manual labour.

Problem is things will go too fast - as you point out the majority of people that work in the laptop class right now won't be able to immediately switch to manual labor. More importantly, they won't want to. Like I pointed out work carries a lot of meaning for people. Besides, I think the changes are so drastic people will demand government intervention even if it isn't strictly needed.

Problem is things will go too fast - as you point out the majority of people that work in the laptop class right now won't be able to immediately switch to manual labor. More importantly, they won't want to. Like I pointed out work carries a lot of meaning for people. Besides, I think the changes are so drastic people will demand government intervention even if it isn't strictly needed.

I think that if it's a question of speed, government intervention is definitely not what is needed. Remember the lethargy over "shovel-ready projects" in the Obama era?

I have no idea what projects you’re referencing.

Government intervention for massive, quick unemployment is one of the main areas we need intervention in my view. When it comes to unemployment, what other frameworks would we need intervention?

Theoretically if it’s a slow collapse of jobs the market can correct and create new ones. When unemployment come fast and furious we need something to bridge the gap.

My point is that governments, especially in highly litigious societies like the US, are not adept at quick action.