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 -
You can make a Marvel movie that happens in a foreign country but is reasonably coherent.
I know this for certain because this movie exists. In this movie the Canadian lead gets into fights with a particular flavor of local gangsters who - importantly - look quite different from 1850's gangsters because the culture of this country has not stood still since 1850. Among other things it had three separate political regimes since then and has developed all kinds of new things and contributed significantly to (and borrowed from) global culture.
Even when motifs from the 1850's are borrowed - as in this scene involving a guy using literal 1850's military gear - it's inescapable that time didn't stop for this country.
Much like in Black Panther, the Canadian gets involved in a succession dispute. He interacts with foreign country's high levels of technology and cultural artifacts, which - critically - are not just random images from documentaries rendered in unobtanium. Foreign country has a this kind of place which isn't just a geisha house but modernized. Foreign country also has this kind of organization which isn't just this kind but with robots. The architecture isn't 1850's functional buildings (e.g thatched huts) used as ornamental motifs on top of modern "green" design.
Finally, the characters in this movie are not motivated by random things that happened years ago in America. The villain had some negative interactions in 1945 with America, positive interactions with the Canadian, but that shit was 80 years ago and he lived a pretty full life since then. He has conversations and battles with the Canadian about things he wants out of life, these interact with the Canadian's personal motivations, and none of them have any reason to talk about the Chinese Exclusion Act or other injustices perpetrated on Americans with the same (American) racial category as him.
After the villain's death, his successor becomes Chairman of the board of directors of a modern corporation. She does not appear to have any interest in starting a foundation for the descendants of indigenous Canadians who survived residential schools.
It's a realistic thought process for an American politician. Do you think Narendra Modi thinks this way?
More options
Context Copy link