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 -
I'm glad that there is now a communist statue to mirror the situation with confederate statues.
I have ancestors that fought for the south in the civil war. I think slavery was an evil institution, but it probably could have been ended without a very bloody war.
I hate communism, and I've disliked many communists that I've met (the feeling was usually mutual, "You'll be one of the first ones against the wall" they'd tell me).
All of that just to say that I feel the same about this monument and the confederate statues: what a stupid thing to argue about. Building it in the first place seems like a waste of funds when your political group is in power. I'd much rather have "my" politicians setting up some kind of bullshit slush fund project that funnels money to favored people. Its also a waste of money to take it down.
If you are local and it really bothers you that much, just resort to good old minor vandalism. The legal penalties aren't that hefty. If you are a local business person with too much to lose, just bail out a local vandal from a legal situation and point him in the right direction.
There is this general vibe that America seems to be picking up that everything political must be solved through the political process.
No! Terrible thought process! The political process has some pros. Its slow, has a lot of deliberation, optimizes for optics over all other considerations, and requires buy in from the semi-respectable class of people in society. Those are also all the cons.
There are three ways to short circuit the political process:
Ignoring it. Sometimes political entities like to talk a big game, but they don't have any actual power. I remember seeing this hilariously illustrated when the student governing council at my college would occasionally pass resolutions or support for foreign countries. Fucking idiots. They couldn't even dictate the menu at the school run cafeteria. Their resolutions of support were time wasters for an entirely impotent "governing" body.
Market solutions. Other times politics finds a problem and claims they can solve it. But unless its a public goods problem, or a tragedy of the commons, we really don't need them. Markets are great at providing goods and services. Hopefully somebody can just provide the product better cheaper and faster than the government can.
[other options]. I once heard of this guy. He had a tree adjacent to his property. The tree was maybe on land owned by the city. The tree would dump acorns and other annoying detritus in his pool. The city didn't really like removing living trees. Well suddenly the tree died over a very short time period. Some kind of weird ground poisoning. Strange! Anyways, tree is gone now.
This is like tearing down statues. You only get to do it if enough people in the government covertly support you that you don't get arrested for it. It wouldn't be difficult for the government to arrest him for killing the tree even with little evidence that he did it, they just decided not to.
Yeah, I'd second this. It's very easy to get away with property damage to a third party if the government wants the property damaged, but that this is at best mixed-benefit in the same way that a "needs killing" defense to murder has a pretty sordid history.
And it goes worse: Wallingford v Bonta has a lot of procedural hilarity, but in addition to the more generic (and caught-on-camera) threats aimed at the Wallingfords, Mrs. Nyugen also poured bleach on a tree on their property. The court issued a multi-year restraining order against the Wallingfords officially for pointing cameras past their own property line, but pragmatically for not submitting.
deleted
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link