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 -
From the UK: White pupils excluded from extra Saturday literacy lessons
There was some discussion at the end of the last CW thread about the purpose of race-based immigration policies. Why not just test directly for IQ? Why use race, which can only be a proxy for other desirable traits like IQ or low criminality? The simple answer is: to avoid situations like this!
In general, I think it's a mistake for ethnonationalists to focus so strongly on purportedly intrinsic psychological properties of certain groups, like IQ or criminality. It does leave you open to the question of why you're an ethno nationalist, instead of an IQ nationalist or a low-crime nationalist (a focus on crime rates in particular leads to consequences that are unpalatable for the far right: if your overriding goal is to reduce crime rates, then you should be trying to build a society that has as few males as possible!).
An argument for ethnonationalism that sidesteps these concerns is that racial discrimination and preferential race-based treatment are more difficult to implement in a racially homogeneous society. If everyone in your city is white, then it won't even make sense for the local school district to set up a special program for black children. Instead, they'll just direct their resources towards the one and only racial group that is actually present.
It will be objected that there can be intra-European ethnic conflicts as well. Why stop at European nationalism? Why not separate out, say, the Anglos and the Germans too, to make sure they don't start engaging in preferential ethnic treatment as well. To which I say: if that's what you want, then fine! If two European ethnic groups did get into an ethnic conflict, then I would recommend (as a possible option, assuming that reconciliation does not seem feasible) that they should split up and live apart from each other as well. But there is currently no such ethnic conflict. There are however active tensions between whites and other groups, so that's the level of analysis that people tend to work at. Ethnonationalism is not an a priori eternal first principle of political organization; it is a pragmatic proposal designed to ameliorate ongoing conflicts, the same way that a couple can propose a divorce if they aren't getting along.
Granted, I don't think a Saturday school program only for black children is a catastrophic loss for white children. I think the school system itself plays a rather small role in a child's "education" anyway, in comparison to genetics and the child's home environment. But it is symptomatic of how it is currently popular to show preferential treatment to non-whites in Western countries today. More sweeping examples would be university affirmative action (recently made illegal in the US, but, I don't think university admissions officers are simply going to give up consideration of race that easily) and corporate DEI initiatives. It simply wouldn't be as appealing for Disney to woke-ify their classic franchises if they were based in a country that was 95% white to begin with.
Haringey is approximately 32% White British. My estimate is that among school-aged children, it’s more like 20%. Most of the white British will be wealthy Londoners who live in the affluent neighborhoods of Highgate and Muswell Hill, who will almost certainly send their children to private schools. (Quite a few of the rest will be Ultra-Orthodox Jews, who have their own schools too). The rest of the borough is “among the most deprived local authorities in England” according to Wikipedia.
My guess is that there are very, very few white english children at the schools sending students to these programs. So while white working class English boys are indeed one of the lowest performing demographics in UK schools (as many conservative opinion columnists have noted in response to this program) there are very, very few of those left in Haringey. (And many if not most of the working class white children in the borough will be the children of slavic immigrants, who seem to perform fine).
For what it’s worth, I think this stuff is pretty smart and pretty good. Whatever becomes of the immigration debate, encouraging a culture of achievement, responsibility, respect for education and conscientiousness in young black men (which this program seems to want to do) is surely a good thing. It would be a bad thing if the government shut it down.
Goes to show how important numerical superiority is. Once the share of the population of ones ethnic group decreases sufficiently, persecution of it becomes of lesser concern. Usually it is the other way a round, with minorities being discriminated against being viewed as less justifiable due to lacking democratic means to defend themselves.
I don’t think it’s of no concern, I just think that the intersection of the venn diagram of:
Native
Poor/working class
Bad literacy
Lives in this part of Haringey and attends one of the schools that is part of this program
..will be almost nonexistent. How many white working class Dutch-American boys go to public schools in the Bronx?
If there are a negligible number of them, then what do you gain by locking them out?
"Sorry Bobby, we want a racially-pure program, so we won't help you" doesn't fly with me even if it's only targeting one student.
I'm not a liberal. I don't believe in universality. If it turns out for a variety of reasons that we discuss here regularly that black kids in this part of London need this extra support with literacy then I don't have a problem with the (largely black, as I understand it) Saturday school teachers doing their best to fix the issue. This is exactly the kind of stuff that, if it works, is actually worth my tax money, as opposed to so much of government spending.
Forgive my ignorance, but that still doesn't answer the question: What do you gain? Are apartheid systems better than universal ones in some way?
I'll admit that most of my opposition is based on liberalism, but even something as bland as "literacy is good" points towards more inclusive programs instead.
More options
Context Copy link
I mean it won’t work- it’s probably more likely to backfire- but that’s par for the course. If extra support for literacy is needed then there’s no reason to expect that discrimination against whites is an important part thereof- if it is, that has to be explicitly argued, which it hasn’t been.
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