site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 15, 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.

9
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I don't see how it follows that allowing drug addicts people to harass strangers and push them in front of subway trains allows for greater innovation. If anything, it would seem to be the opposite. What's the mechanism here? Is the thought that someone like Kanye West would be jailed in Taiwan? I'm not sure that's true. I'm also not sure that there is no innovation in East Asia.

One thing I'm fairly certain of is that innovation in the United States now is lower than it was pre-1970 when crime and decay was much lower than today.

My hypothesis would be that the same degeneration which causes drug addiction and crime also lowers our creative capacity.

Well the libertarian ethos that has defended wealthy weirdos and their right to innovate and Do Their Own Thing is certainly wedded to the uncomfortable subway person in spirit.

And America's love of rags to riches stories also suggests that the uncomfortable subway person may one day be a startup founder!

In libertarian utopia, drug shops would be on every corner, and so would be gun shops.

In libertarian utopia, everyone would be packing, and when drug addicts start making problems, sober citizens will not need "cops" or "marines" to save them, sober citizens will draw faster, fire more accurately and solve their problems themselves once and for all.

(at least, this is what the theory says)

In short, this subway situation would be impossible in libertarian world, and no way could be blamed on "libertarian ethos".

I see. You're doing the No True Scotsman redefining of libertarianism to the stricter anarcho-capitalism only

Correct, to get the subway situation you need anarcho-tyranny. The state claims a monopoly on force, then fails to enforce it against crazy homeless drug addicts, but comes down like a ton of bricks on anyone who tries to handle said crazy homeless drug addicts themselves.

Yeah, that sounds about right. Kind of like the alcoholic's belief that their heavy drinking is somehow making them more interesting. Possible in some cases I suppose, but mostly it's just bad storytelling and cope from people who want to believe that there must be some reason that bad things happen.