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 -
On giving parents votes for their children
One idea that people here have mentioned a couple of times has been to give parents a vote for each underage child they have. The more I think about it, the better this proposal seems, and not only just that, but almost everyone, no matter where they are on the political spectrum should find something in it they support.
Firstly on the logistics front this is very simple to implement. We already have a database of who is the legal parent of who, and whether or not they are emancipated from their parents. Every non-emancipated child's parents get a ballot paper in a different colour to the standard one (say a green ballot paper vs white for adults) which is worth half of a normal vote. So overall both parents of a child get half an extra vote that they can use to vote as they wish. Then we can just count the votes after the election, giving 1/2 weighting to the green ballots. If you have 4 children you are legally the parent of (and responsible for), then you get 1 white and 4 green ballots every election, totally to 3 full votes. Any emancipated children get their full vote, as they are already considered adults for many other things.
This method removes the argument that children shouldn't get a vote because they aren't well developed enough to choose themselves what they want. We already trust parents to act in their child's best interest for many things, asking parents to vote for them as well isn't much of a stretch beyond this. It also rewards parents for sticking with their children and raising them well, as you only get to vote on their behalf if you accept responsibility for them.
The consequences of such a policy would be very positive. Firstly the greater political power handed to parents over non-parents would lead to policies favouring those with children, which would help increase the abysmal birth rates of many western countries as having a child becomes more beneficial/less of a burden. Parents are generally considered as having more stake in the long term future of society too, so giving greater political power to them would shift society towards more long term thinking too, which is sorely lacking at the moment.
Parents tend to be more conservative than childless people, controlling for all the usual factors. Giving them extra voting power would almost certainly shift the Overton window rightwards. Expect to see greater focus on tackling crime, nicer neighbourhoods and better schools if such a policy comes to pass.
At the moment the age of the median voter is significantly higher than the average age of the population as whole. This leads to greater emphasis being placed on the concerns of the old disproportionately, see for example the UK where attacking the entitlements of the old (pensions, high house prices etc.) is effectively a no-go area, as whichever party does this is certain to take a drubbing at the next election. Giving children the vote via their parents would fix this issue, the age of the median voter (controlled for vote power) would come down a fair bit, thus shifting political focus away from the concerns of the old towards the concerns of those of childbearing age.
Equally at the moment in many western countries due to demographic differences in age cohorts minorities have significantly less voting power than you would expect given their share of the population. This is due to minorities being disproportionately minors (pun not intended) who don't get the vote. Thus current political focus is disproportionately focused on placating whites. Such a change would hand more power to minorities in the country allowing them to push for policies that are best for themselves and their children, rather than just what white progressives say are best for themselves and their children. Doing this basically just pushes the voting demographics of a country forward by 18 years, it's going to happen anyways, might as well just accept it now even if you are white.
And children themselves probably benefit the most from such a policy. Parents generally put great emphasis on giving the best possible start to their children, and many already vote accordingly to what they believe is going to be best for them. Amplifying their voices relative to the childless will probably lead to these children entering a world more suited for them when they reach adulthood than presently.
Basically no matter whether you are conservative or liberal, white or a minority, young or old, giving votes to the parents of children is a policy that has something to offer you.
I know you're a troll. I know that you're being deliberately smarmy and arrogant to get a rise out of people. I know your racial trumphalism is particularly designed to irritate the far right members of this forum and provoke them, so they react and get banned.
But I just can't help myself. Is this how obese people feel when they walk into a takeaway? Is this how coomers feel when they see a human girl? Is this how you muslims feel when you walk past a primary school?
How is giving minorities more power going to bring about nicer neighborhoods? Do minorities produce especially nice neighborhoods when left alone by White people? What about schools? The usual state of affairs - both on the national and the world stage - is that you destroy what you have and demand access to a White area. What exactly is the mechanism of action for producing nice areas and schools and what are nice areas and schools in this context?
Somehow, I think that what you mean by nice areas and school and what I mean are something completely different.
The idea that more minority voters will reduce crime is so laughable it's not worth discussing.
He may be all of that, and still you took the bait. Given this is not your first or second or third time being "provoked" in such a manner, consider what it says that that you gave him exactly what he wanted. One week ban for personal antagonism and generalized boo outgroup raging.
More options
Context Copy link
He’s not a troll, the deeply ingrained hostility towards non-muslims is entirely genuine. The idea that there’s a mass of moderate well-integrated muslims is the lie. I wonder if the people who peddle it ever talked to your average muslim. I suspect they’re never asking the right questions: about apostates, the place of unbelievers in society, the ‘law of god’ versus law of man, 9/11, or jews.
Although Burdensomecount is rather coy and sophisticated about what his ideal society looks like. Not unlike muslim intellectuals like Tariq Ramadan and Jamal Khashoggi , who say democratization when they mean islamization, and let western idiots believe what they want to believe. Same game the ayatollah played long ago.
Yeah he's basically validating the framework of the far right- framing demographic trends as conquest and the like. It's not trolling, it's just acknowledging that the "far right" is correct about the implications of demographic change and BurdensomeCount knows that he can just gloat about it rather than take the mainstream view that this is all going to just result in a slight change of skin color and slightly different gene pool- no big deal.
He's also right that it is ultimately our own fault for letting it happen.
I much prefer @BurdensomeCount's gloating about an imminent conquest which is our fault for allowing to happen, a tough but fair assessment, to @2rafa's "a hundred years from now, Britain's elite may have a slightly different shade, a slightly different gene pool. But, one suspects, they will still attend Wimbledon in July" delusions downplaying the civilizational impact of demographic replacement.
Hey, I would attend Wimbledon in July if I could get tickets easily at reasonable prices. Shit's wild at the moment, Wimbledon debentures (which guarantee you a seat for 5 years) trade for close to 6 figures...
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
You’re technically correct, but only because the “moderate, well-integrated” Muslims become apostates.
More options
Context Copy link
I have no hostility towards non-Muslims. Most of my friends are non-Muslims and I support them living the lives they wish to live. It is not my business to meddle in their affairs, all I ask in return is that they don't meddle in mine.
Oh God no, Islamization is 100% a bad thing. Like Aristotle I support a happy middle. Western countries have become too godless and need to move back, however most Islamic countries are too Islamic for the modern world and stifling towards those of other faiths as well as many Muslims (including myself) too.
9/11 was bad and it is good the perpetrators got punished and I hope they suffer in hellfire for their sin. This is the 21st century, we do not need to conquer the west with violence, we'll do it with love instead (by having more children than you).
Jews are great for humanity if you ask me. I've had almost completely positive interactions with the Ashkenazi Jews I've had the pleasure to meet. If the Arab Palestinians had control of the land of Israel it would almost certainly be a worse place than it is today in the hands of competent Jews. Basically I consider the Israel to be the only competent state in the ME and competence is something I generally want to see more of in our world. I am unabashedly, 100% pro Israel. If the world was ran by Jews it would be in a far better state than it is at the moment.
What about the other questions, penalty for apostates, and sharia? If "your side" wins, what's your plan for imposing your reformist agenda on your brothers in muhammad without getting killed? Supporting an al-sisi or muhammad bin salman?
As to your hostility, let me put it this way: I guessed your religion long before you revealed anything about yourself. Muslim resentment towards the country they choose to live in really stands out. I don't know if it's a slave morality thing from the “slaves of allah” or just the sheer magnitude of that religion's failures.
Apostasy is fine, sad but fine. Belief can not and should not be compelled. I'm very very secularized as a person, to the point that compared to my brethren back home I'm practically irreligious (I don't pray 5 times a day, I weak silk and gold, I dance etc.).
Unbelievers have a place in society just as much as anyone else does. An Islamic society should be structured so that being a Muslim is easy, it should not be structured in a way that makes the lives of non-Muslims hard.
To quote Ambrose, "while in Rome, do as the Roman do". Hence while I am in the west I follow the laws of the west, even though they are not my preferred laws (btw, OG Sharia, is also not my preferred social system) and ask others of my faith to do so as well. Naturally I think some of your laws should be changed, but I wish to have them changed through your system for updating laws, namely democracy (much as I dislike it, it's how things are done in your country) rather than violence, hence my support for my people having more children in the west (conversely back home I'm the opposite, I'm like "stop having kids you idiots, condoms exist"; different social and political realities in diferent countries).
I would not say I'm resentful at all, I think I have the mentality of a conqueror far more than that of a slave, here to beat you at your own game (democracy) and then rule over what is left. Not personally ruling over your people, I'm too fickle and easily distracted for that, but our culture ruling over yours. I have a very very internal locus of control, I don't believe I am a ward of fate at all, bur that that we make our own luck. The "resentment" is just a tactic that works well on progressives and other assorted whites for getting power for those who are like me, and so I do it and support my people doing it. Much like taking an Aspirin for a headache, I do it because it works, not because I am beholden to some Cult of the Willow. If it stopped working, I would stop doing it. You people only have yourselves to blame for the current state of affairs.
MBS is probably the best thing to come out of Saudi Arabia for a long long time.
A conqueror can be a slave, eg slave-soldiers, mamluks and janissaries. An islamic specialty, though not exclusive to them.
How much control do you really have over your own life? Let’s say you decided to become an apostate. That would have consequences, perhaps even death, if you were ‘out’ and visiting pakistan. Although advocating for a ‘modern’ version of islam publically, expressing admiration for jews etc like you do here, may be enough, if you walked through the wrong neighorhood, pissed off the wrong people.
Therefore you are under constant threat of death, like a slave. The lowest english prole, as a free man, has more control over his own life than you have. It’s acceptable to you to be lower than the elites, but intolerable to be lower than the scum. Hence, your resentment towards them in particular.
No one likes to admit they are powerless slaves compelled by brute force, so you try to convince yourself that apostasy is a ‘sad’ choice you rejected out of your own will. As you say, personally you don’t even go for the whole package, you’re not convinced on a deep level, you stop exactly at the point where they apply the blade.
I am under constant threat of death of being run over by a bus every time I go out. It doesn't make me tremble in fear. Same with back home in Pakistan. Everyone there is under greater risk of dying in a suicide bomb attack, but people don't let that influence their lives due to how rare such attacks are as well as more pressing concerns.
No. I am an open an proud Freemason, and Freemasonry is also looked at very dimly in Islamic Countries (due to it providing an alternative social group, thus weakening the powers of the mullahs etc). People have been executed for mere membership of our fraternity in Muslim countries. And yet I talk openly about it. I am not a prole and arrange my affairs to minimize my contact with them, they have next to no power over people like me, a single extra peep out of them more than their allotment and the military snaps their spine like a toothpick (yes, this is the military where drinking whisky is basically a stereotype among the higher ranks). Some minor lone wolf attacks happen from time to time and might hurt us if they manage to get past our private security but where we have our house back home there are so many people like me that we have strength in numbers. The probability of me in particular or someone close to me getting hurt, even if I lived there full time, are minimal. Generally though the people that die in these attacks are other proles.
Back home we have connections to the "wrong people" you don't want to piss off. And the "wrong people" by and large tend to be more westernized than the unwashed masses. Yes there are parts of the country I would not visit, but that's nothing to do with my belief system, I wouldn't recommend visiting those areas even if you are merely wearing western clothing, that on its own is enough to mark you out.
But the thing is, I would never ever visit those areas in the first place, what ever would they have to offer me?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
He is a troll and a muslim.
Wrong.
@BurdensomeCount - Do not engage in this kind of one-word "Nuh uh" back and forth.
@Ioper - Don't engage in low effort ad hominems like this.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link