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 -
The progress should "progress" somewhere, right. So what's more obvious way to progress than to make everything more fair? The urge to try something "fairer" is quite understandable i think. I do agree with you that it's not the right way, but it's hard to propose any actual alternative to that. "The universe is inherently unfair so no point trying" isn't convincing many. Stupid dysfunctional species cornered themselves into playing god and constantly failing, obviously.
"Fair" is just an applause light. Marxism doesn't result in "fair". It results in "poor". Try something else.
The urge of the majority of marxism supporters, at least the idealistic ones, is to make the reality more fair. That's why they're trying and trying and will keep trying. You don't need to convince me, but can't you really see how any random fact of perceived unfairness brings people towards trying to make things more "fair" the way the understand it?
As I said "fair" is just an applause light. Brought to the concrete level it just seems to mean they want more for them and theirs and (very important for many Marxists) less for not-them and theirs, which is a common desire but lacks the high-mindedness of "fair". There's always going to be perceived unfairness, and Marxism is always going to be one of the worst ways to attempt to alleviate it.
Sure, so there always will be the way to "progress" things towards. Look, you've asked a very simple question - "Why do we have to keep doing it?", i've explained why. Are you arguing because you think people keep trying marxism for other reasons? Or are you arguing because you think the reason i say is correct, you just don't agree with it?
It's not my fault that young people find marxism or any of it's many versions convincing enough to make the world a more fairer place. There's very little alternative ideas which can in simple words address that "fairness" urge directly. The others are mostly sidestepping the problem - oh, the unfairness is always and eternal, we're in hell and nothing you can do about it, be a good boy and clean your room(sure! thinks 15yo boy whos mother killing herself every day on the heavy job and he sees that, while watching western celebrities on TV), ah, the world is already perfectly fair and harmonious, don't you see? (yup! thinks the father whos son just returned without half of his head from a war over someones bank account) and so on.
Your explanation amounts to the Politician's Fallacy -- "We must do something (to alleviate unfairness). This (Marxism) is something. Therefore we must do it."
We don't have to take Marxism at its word that it makes the world more fair, not when the actual results have been demonstrated over and over again. Nor is it necessary to have an alternate solution in order to reject Marxism.
I'm sorry, i have a stupid habit of editing my message a lot, so if you care enough to look at it again - i think i'm trying to explain there that it's not just that the marxism is "something", therefore we must do that. But it's trying to address the problem(real or not, but it's very common perceived problem in our world full of terrors) directly, and it's doing it convincingly enough for many. And the lack of simple enough alternative way towards is helping marxism greatly.
It's claiming to address the problem. I think the reason it's doing it convincingly enough for many is those many want the skulls. Or at least the part where it harms those who are not them. In which case sensible people should look at these people and note that they are the enemy and should be fought rather than accommodated.
Maybe many do want the skulls and in many cases it's the obvious effect perceivable unfairness has on people. And in their eyes sensible people should look at the reason why the unfairness happens and note that those responsible are the enemy and should be fought rather that accomodated. Capitalists, white people, man, bigots and so on.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link