site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of July 31, 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.

12
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

If you've browsed alternative politics communities for any period of time, you've noticed that people on supposedly opposite sides tend to use each other's language and terminology "ironically". (IE, "Moid"/"Foid", "Incel", "Chud", "Libtard", "Dudes rock") Likewise, people tend to enjoy the same entertainment media: Strategy games, dialogue heavy RPGs, The Cyberpunk genre and it's associated political themes. Why do supposedly "leftist" subreddits (stupidpol, Redscarepod) get flooded with rightoids when there's a banwave?

I have a theory that many people are actually sort of a meta-fan of the politics fandom. When you're into weird, obscure political philosophers like Julius Evola or Ted Kaczynski or Max Stirner or whoever, you're not actually "more right" or "more left", you're into alternative politics itself.

If you believe that the US government is controlled by a select group of international enthonationalists, it's not that hard to generalize that belief to a class-struggle framework. Likewise, if you believe in class-struggle, it's not crazy to notice that certain upper classes, particularly in Washington DC, have over-representation from certain groups and strong in-group political loyalty to those groups.

Anyone else notice a similar effect? I'm still trying to develop my thesis.

Counterpoint: Political groups have had no issue taking the supposed insults from their opposition and turning it into a badge of pride, regardless of the format.

'Yankee Doodle' was supposed to be an insult. For a more recent occurrence, 'Keep your Rifle By Your Side' was supposed to be atleast slightly satire, until people listened to it, went 'Holy shit, this song slaps' and started using it unironically.

It's a phenomena that's not really new by any stretch.

In 1948 the father of the British NHS, Labour Minister and paragon of virtue (/s) Aneurin Bevan made a speech denouncing Tories as “lower than vermin”.

Thus, the founding of the Vermin Club.

My favourite example of a British Tory doing this is Norman Tebbit, who was a key early ally of Margaret Thatcher and who would go on to be the main minister responsible for implementing her anti-union policies. Tebbit consistently maintained that the closed shop was a form of fascism, because it required workers to join a union they didn't want to in order to keep their jobs. In 1978, this eventually provoked Michael Foot (who was one of the leaders of the far-left faction within the then-ruling Labour party) to call him a "semi house-trained polecat".

Tebbit's wife was disabled by an IRA bomb in 1984, and he retired from front-line politics in order to care for her. As was then usual for senior politicians who retire while still young enough to contribute, he was made a Lord. This entitled him to a coat of arms - which led to the burning question of what does a heraldic polecat look like? Eventually the College of Arms decided that heraldic polecats were semi-mythical creatures similar to heraldic tygers, and could fly. So Lord Tebbit's shield is held up by winged polecats.

That's great.

Do you have a picture? Wikipedia only shows this. I'm not really up to date on my heraldry, but it doesn't seem to match their own description. And Google just provides news articles about the guy. He's been busy.

The description ("blazon" in heraldry-speak) includes "supporters" - i.e. animals that hold up the shield similar to the lion and unicorn on the royal arms. Not sure why they are not in the picture on wikipedia. I tried to find a picture of the shield with supporters, but my google-fu only found the wikipedia version.

Eventually the College of Arms decided that heraldic polecats were semi-mythical creatures similar to heraldic tygers, and could fly. So Lord Tebbit's shield is held up by winged polecats.

Reminds me of the "beaver" on the coat of arms of Irkutsk.

deleted

(Does anyone know how to inline links?)

It's markdown.

tl;dr use: [text](http://link)

Cool, thanks :)