site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 3, 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.

6
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

From that Washington Post article:

"Deep state” refers the unsubstantiated idea, frequently invoked by Trump, that a group of bureaucrats is working to undermine elected officials in order to shape government policy.

I'm not sure which annoys me more, that they don't even pretend that an opposing view might be worth hearing out, or that they have stopped bothering with proofreading as well.

It’s a poor definition of the deep state. The deep state exists, but it’s not about undermining the elected government. The deep state is all of the agencies that the elected government has given the power, for all practical purposes, to create legislation to run the state rather than do so itself. So you have OSHA banning chemicals in the workplace or requiring safety equipment rather than making the legislators do it. Or they have the FDA declare pot schedule I and thus illegal rather than them doing so themselves. And so these agencies have taken on a life of their own governing the nation, but without pesky things like elections or balance of power or accountability to hold them back.

The deep state is more than that, it's when a bureaucracy becomes so large and so ossified and so specialized that replacing people becomes impractical. Producing a kind of feudalism, where directors of departments can't be forced to implement policies they don't want to.

J. Edgar Hoover is the ne plus ultra American example. See also Obama stating that his efforts to pull out of Afghanistan were consistently thwarted by "The Generals" engaging in foot dragging or sabotage. Much of The Ferguson Effect can also be traced to localized Deep States, with cops collectively engaging in work slowdown at a scale where discipline or replacement becomes impractical.

You can't just fire bureaucrats without skilled replacements on hand, unless you want to destroy the entire governing apparatus. It turns reform into chicken, who will swerve first?

Which is why rather than reform the IRS, we should simply privatize it.

I modeled the Furguson Effect more as a work to rule union slow-down.

I'm not sure I can apply that to the deep state.

The deep-statey aspect is that no sizable city can just replace its police force. Not an option, not possible, not happening. So no matter what mayor you elect, or what police commissioner you elect, or what laws the state passes, if the police decide against you there is simply no practical way to enforce the decision.

To what end? Even the towns that would be small enough to fire all their police, would then have less control over policing by the subsequent agency until thw town reconstitutes its own force. Once you've lost so many of the police there are none to enforce the law you've also likely lost the consent of the governed or made the expectations and duties of the police untenable. I see the police more like firemen, garbagemen or water and power workers, infrastructure.

The deep state is more public private partnership.

What do you mean by pubic private partnership?

The police are a simple and clear model, but it applies equally to every department. You can't just fire the entire EPA, the entire DoD, the entire Treasury department. At a sufficient level of determination, bureaucrats can play chicken with the public: anarchy or the status quo. Elected officials, no matter how powerful, are stuck with the people they have.