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.

TBF Scott's "pseudonym" was originally only intended to block prospective bosses from finding his blog on cursory name search; it wasn't really intended to protect against cancellation. It achieved what it was supposed to i.e. getting him hired.

Also, a decent chunk of these people were literal teenagers at the time that they made those mistakes, and this is hardly limited to Rats.

It's preposterous, and a sign of the times, that one needs to be well-versed in opsec in order to freely speak their mind. The highest degree of opsec is to simply never share your thoughts, never post anything online, ever.

Alternatively you could don the mask and assume a digital alter ego, extraverting all the opinions of orthodoxy while suppressing your more controversial takes. Dissociative identity disorder for the digital era.

Both modes of living are fundamentally dishonest, misrepresentative, and, indeed, miserable.

Freedom of expression without fear of cancellation and censure is required for one to affirm their identity. Anything else is robbing one of their ability to authentically express their identity and who they are.

It's preposterous, and a sign of the times, that one needs to be well-versed in opsec in order to freely speak their mind.

Maybe it's a sign of the times, but this isn't anything unique to the internet. The Federalist Papers were published under pseudonyms.

Arguably, it's a sign of the times that a significant many on the internet aren't practicing opsec. When the internet first started, people were just screen names in ephemeral chat rooms. Now, they use their real names, with real photos of themselves, leaving behind permanent posts on social media sites describing everything in detail for the entire world to see.

The highest degree of opsec is to simply never share your thoughts, never post anything online, ever.

Technically true, but that's like saying the highest degree of transport safety is to never drive or get in a car, ever.

(And before the urbanists go "this but unironically", might I point out that bikes, trains, trams, and planes still have accidents too, so the technically-true highest degree would also avoid those.)

Both modes of living are fundamentally dishonest, misrepresentative, and, indeed, miserable.

I don't see how this follows. There's nothing fundamentally dishonest or misrepresentative about adopting a pseudonym. It also doesn't have to be miserable. 90% of opsec is shutting up, and that could get many people by for many years. You would only have to do the remaining 10% if you're really paranoid.

Freedom of expression without fear of cancellation and censure is required for one to affirm their identity. Anything else is robbing one of their ability to authentically express their identity and who they are.

I don't find much value in having my identity affirmed or expressed.

Arguably, it's a sign of the times that a significant many on the internet aren't practicing opsec. When the internet first started, people were just screen names in ephemeral chat rooms. Now, they use their real names, with real photos of themselves, leaving behind permanent posts on social media sites describing everything in detail for the entire world to see.

I know this. I grew up on IRC, where the first rule you learned was never to use your real name or give out any personally identifying information on the Internet.

This changed when Zuck came along, and normalized the exact opposite behaviour. Now, if you don't have any digital persona attached to your real name due to stringent practice of opsec, you are automatically regarded with suspicion.

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you have no presence online, people assume the worst anyway. I'm tired of hiding behind a pseudonym, as I have done since I first logged onto the net in the mid 2000s.

90% of opsec is shutting up

Sure. Never express yourself, just keep everything held down.

I don't find much value in having my identity affirmed or expressed.

This seems to be one of the most pertinent problems of our time.

Sure. Never express yourself, just keep everything held down.

That is not what I meant. What I meant is that, for example, if you don't want to reveal to others where you live, you shouldn't mention the name of your city or town. Basic stuff like that. You can still express yourself.

This seems to be one of the most pertinent problems of our time.

How is it a problem? Arguably, it's the other way around, and wanting your identity affirmed or expressed is the problem. The entire trans movement and its externalities stem from a misguided goal to affirm and express their identities.

That is not what I meant. What I meant is that, for example, if you don't want to reveal to others where you live, you shouldn't mention the name of your city or town. Basic stuff like that. You can still express yourself.

Except, it's not your self being expressed under a pseudonym. It's your digital simulacrum.

I mean, yes. But arguably even if you do link your real-life identity, it's still a digital simulacrum, because typing text is different than saying words in real life. Is there a standard by which if you reveal enough details on a pseudonym, it's no longer considered a "digital simulacrum"?

Isn't much of this downstream of irl rewards accruing to people who post online?

On Facebook circa 2006, the reward was being cool and maybe getting a date. On Twitter and Instagram circa 2022 it became getting enough followers to monetize and move into the real media like a JomBoy or a Hanania.

It's preposterous, and a sign of the times, that one needs to be well-versed in opsec in order to freely speak their mind.

No it's not, the weird moment in the late 90s/early 00s where the rest of society hadn't quite caught on to the existince of the internet was just that. A weird momemnt. What we are seeing now is a return to the status quo.

The biggest example I have in mind is of someone who didn't make opsec mistakes as a teenager, only as an adult.

Fair enough.