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 -
I feel the situation is more, as others have alluded to, a bit of a camera issue.
The Hunter Biden stuff and the J6 Trump stuff are wild from a lot of angles. But it seems like the cameras get turned off every time something wild breaks. Similar to European football games where the cameras are turned downward every time someone runs into the field naked or there is a fight in the stands.
Alternatively it's a bit like watching Eurovision the year after Russia invaded Ukraine. There was only going to be one winner and everyone knew it was Ukraine. American politics feel a bit like who is going to get 2nd kind of thing, since everyone knows the big issues aren't affected by the election. As Trump, the ultimate outsider underdog extraordinaire showed.
I haven't really kept up with the Hunter Biden stuff. My surface-level understanding is that Hunter himself has been involved in bad shit, but there's little proof it goes up to the president himself. I heard Hunter got a suspiciously good deal at first, but again this doesn't really implicate Joe.
The J6 stuff has just been glacial legal drama.
Not sure I get the analogy to Eurovision. The president absolutely does matter quite a lot in the US's system since he has a ton of power concentrated in his hands. Some of it is sapped by Congressional deadlock and much can be reversed by a successor, but it's still very important. The fact that Trump barely did anything lasting besides SCOTUS stuff is more of an indictment of him than it is of the institution.
I have to be honest I don’t understand people like you as it seems to be more Joes involvement in Hunters deals has been obvious since 2016. They had Hunters business partner say he was involved at the 2016 debates. There have been wire transfers, request to Hunter to talk to his dad and him making phone calls, emails directly to Joes burner email, shared office space between Joe/Hunter/CCP member, dinners between Joe/Hunter/Business partners. I feel like anyone who spends time in online spaces would be familiar with these things. The left media which probably includes most of the msm likely repeats the no linkages part. They might be right that he could beat a criminal charge but there is a lot of evidence Joe was fully involved.
Perhaps, we just live in a world where repeating a narrative works.
Do you have a link from a neutral source going over Joe Biden's connection?
A neutral source won’t exists. No media entity is “neutral” anymore.
But here’s a partial list. More have been discovered since and I’ve forgotten 90%.
https://nypost.com/2022/04/06/heres-a-dozen-times-joe-biden-played-a-role-in-hunters-deals/
I don’t see why the reporter matters. If things are verified their verified.
"Neutral" was probably the wrong word. "Not right-wing" would be better. Really just anything established that's not on the same tier as Infowars or Breitbart. NYP is... alright I guess.
Almost all of this list is Hunter himself selling access. I don't like it, I wish it wouldn't happen, and Joe should probably kick Hunter to the curb over this stuff. But the access seems pretty limited (typically just a meeting), and Kushner was absolutely doing this sort of thing during Trump's tenure way more egregiously. Major policy decisions actually came from Kushner's doings. If you ever wondered why MAGAworld seemed weirdly obsessed with Israel to the point of exhausting lots of political capital on the topic, that was basically just Kushner.
The one area where this exceeds "just a meeting" would be if Joe got money from one of these deals, as that would skirt close to "bribery". There was the thing over "payments for the big guy" but I've never heard of much evidence supporting it, and it hasn't gone anywhere.
There was holding ten for the big guy, and then there was Hunter in his texts crying about everything he does for his family, including giving half of his salary to "pop": https://nypost.com/2022/04/09/hunter-biden-frequently-covered-family-expenses-texts-reveal/
Wasn’t that pretty transparently because every dollar Hunter has ever made fell through his hands and Joe wanted him to pay his debts, save his money and leave something to his children?
Forbes claims Hunter is worth like $200M -- considering that he managed this while already at a pretty high hookers-blow index (and one usually either ages out of this sort of thing or has an unexpected heart attack and dies around his age), it seems likely to last a while?
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link