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 heard a quote awhile ago that was something like "be careful telling people they are Nazis, because one day they might believe you."
If every young white man who has a valid criticisms of the prevailing cultural dogma is pigeonholed into that classification, the author isn't doing himself any favors. It's true that Dissident Right talking points are increasingly being embraced by the mainstream conservative movement. Is that due to sadism, or is it maybe because the DR is getting at something real, and the perspective can no longer be ignored by the conservative talking heads?
Here's Matt Walsh a couple weeks ago:
It would have been unthinkable for someone like Matt Walsh to say this even a few years ago. Matt isn't saying this because he's sadistic, he's saying it because the prevailing cultural dogma is actually pretty hostile to white people. Gaslighting people with "If you believe that you're a Nazi" has greatly contributed to the Nazi memes, I can guarantee you that.
This is so uncharitable that it bears no resemblance to reality. Let's take a look at one of the many various compilation videos of Hitler's speeches that gets clicks from e-fascists. The fascist subjectivity here is not the indulgence of sadistic feelings. It invokes:
Feelings of revolutionary triumph from an undesirable status quo
Sense of community
Strong leader with a charismatic devotion to the people
Proposing the nation as inherited from a people
The author has no understanding whatsoever for why this propaganda is compelling to those people, and why there might be a lack of these elements in the present culture that does indeed explain Trump and the growing influence of the Dissident Right. But it's not due to sadism, it's due to very real deficiencies in the culture that do not provide for these human needs, so they are sought in heterodox and taboo spaces.
Edit: OP deleted the post, which was just a copy + paste of this article with no additional commentary.
Well, in many ways you and Ganz make the same argument (at least until he starts psychologizing, of course). Ganz actually agrees with you that, say, Elon discussing Soros memes is world-historically significant. He’d probably highlight the same Matt Walsh quote. The thing that he’s apparently noticing is the thing you point out regularly in this thread in your top-level posts and comments.
Yes I agree with Ganz on a lot of what he it saying, but at some point he has to recognize that the gaslighting isn't going to work and acknowledge that people who gravitate towards right-wing radical politics kind of have a point, and they aren't there to indulge some latent demand for inner sadism. The mainstream starting to adopt radical talking points and slogans is more acknowledgment that there are salient points to their underlying perspective that the mainstream can no longer entirely ignore.
Honestly, Ganz seems like he could be a cheerleader of fascism, he identifies some real undercurrents and then just denounces them as racist or antisemitic like they are self-evidently wrong. I have to believe when he goes on about something like "Reactionary Modernism" and says:
You know some people are going "sounds kind of based", but Ganz seems to think that if he can tie something to fascist thought he has proven it to be wrong.
Why? Or what? Finish the thought. The real world isn't a logic proof, and people are really good at clinging on to irrational and incorrect beliefs out sheer tribal affiliation, or contrarianism, etc.
This is my first exposure to Ganz, but he seems to have penchant for making fascism seem way cooler and more credible than the best propaganda efforts of the radical right. Self-deception can go far, but only so much. Is he going to say Matt Walsh is a fascist now indulging in his inner sadism, and the Daily Wire is primed to join the techno-fascist takeover to constitute the Silicon Reich? Maybe he will, but at some point he seems like a smart person and I think he will recognize his model of the world breaking down such that he has to acknowledge some sort of substance to the radical right beyond sadism and fatalism. It's not a high bar.
But in the meantime, his articles I've read so far are enjoyable, and he does have a good finger on the pulse of some esoteric undercurrents among the Radical Right, but he seems resistant to interpreting them rationally.
I mean, this is not that uncommon an opinion on the activist left, so yes probably? Moreover, "fascist" just means "evil." Orwell recognized this back in the 40's, when OG fascism was still technically alive. So there's no real mental model to the term that can be confronted with contrary detail.
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