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 -
Had a response, realized who's posting, and realized that it's all a bit too tidy. Oh, yeah, are you deeply affronted by users like sentinellgrave? You're not posting that looking to elicit a response of any sort? Definitely not attempting to move the needle in any particular direction?
No they definitely don't, the rules don't really allow me to express my sentiments in their fullest viscerallity about what should be done about such people who do these acts of racial terrorism and what should happen to their appeasers. My fucking god how cucked and brainwashed must you be in the moment of such tragedy to be advocating for your attacker and their group.
PM me your sentiments instead. I’ll tip you.
I’m very surprised, in the past 5-10 years there have been a number (handful?) of these high visibility cases where the family, typically parents of these victims make sure to prioritize giving a public statement of some racial slave morality bent. In a proper country these family members would be held accountable as accomplice to these homicides. I’ll throw “stochastic” in front of homicide to give it the imprimatur of reason.
As the wheel turns in reaction against the culture these displays issue from, we might one day delight in seeing them crushed underneath that wheel.
What this brought to mind was the father of a kidnapped and murdered daughter saying that the cohort from which his daughter's murderer came were, "Iowans with better food," as if street tacos and breakfast burritos can make up for your murdered daughter.
You seem to be implying that he said that having his daughter murdered is an acceptable trade-off for good food. He didn't. He just said that the vast majority of Mexicans are not violent murderers and they shouldn't be collectively punished for the actions of a single madman.
Assuming you are a White American, I don't think you are in any way responsible for the actions of John Wayne Gacy. If you are from a different ethnic group, I'm sure it has produced similarly evil people, and you are not responsible for their actions unless you directly assisted them.
I don't think anyone makes the Gacy association, though I wonder to what extent this is because Gacy was a gay Democratic organizer, and thus has too many counter-signals in his identity. But we are told, every single day, by the dominant institutions of power and culture, that we are responsible for the actions of Derek Chauvin. We're told every single day that everything from microaggressions at work to the bullets from a policeman's gun are products of the swirling cauldron of whiteness, and that we all contribute to it from the day we are born, and that we must drain our lives and resources in silent deference and atonement. Comments like these only highlight that some groups get the privilege of nuance, while others must simply endure being treated as an amorphous mass of social toxins.
And that's setting aside that no one had the ability to stop Gacy from being in the country, since he was born an American. Mexican migrants, particularly illegal ones, are here as the result of deliberate policy decisions to do nothing about them. If a father who has just lost his daughter cannot even question the wisdom of those policy decisions, he deserves contempt. But my sympathy is limited, as I'm sure his daughter would have never questioned those policies either, even as the knife went in. Some people just bare their necks to the world.
I actually considered using Chauvin as an example instead of Gacy. I opted for Gacy because his actions are much more unambiguously evil and indefensible. Given this site's bent, there was a possibility that some might believe Chauvin's actions were justified, in which case the example wouldn't work.
Anyway, White Americans are not responsible for Chauvin's actions either.
No one decided to deliberately let in murderers. Yes, if you let in millions of people, some of them are probably going to commit murder. But unless they commit murder at a higher rate, you are not actually increasing the natives' probability of being murdered. In that case, highlighting individual murders committed by immigrants is dishonest fearmongering.
The question then is whether immigrants do commit violent crimes at a higher rate. Apparently this is not the case and illegal immigrants actually commit less violent crime than natives.
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
More options
Context Copy link