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 -
To me it just sounds like a straw man. Every human organization, including a conspiracy, has factions and internal politics. And all the factions of permanents government are not shy about acting in their common interests and coordinate.
To take a normal feature of any group and say that because this group has it, it's not real means that you are assuming your conclusion.
I repeat myself but to you a conspiracy is not a real object and any real large scale collusion can't be a conspiracy because it must somehow imply unreal features like perfect cooperation between all agents.
If you're not willing to call the bolcheviks a conspiracy against the provisional government, you don't have a serious definition of conspiracy.
Factions and internal politics implies an organization where people are in some relation to each other.
The creative artists and the studio execs at Disney are two internal factions of a single organization that work together on projects while politicking against each other for how those projects are run.
The creative artists at Disney and the marketing execs at Nike are not internal factions of anything. They're just entirely disparate groups with nothing connecting them to each other.
Some things are conspiracies, some things aren't, the 'deep state' isn't.
And I swear to god, if we have to do another round of this, I'm just going to google up the legalpedia definition of a criminal conspiracy and let you argue against that.
Legal definitions have nothing to do with what we're talking about. Which is political conspiracies.
A conspiracy or plot, in the political sense, is a group of people united to usurp, overthrow or subvert an established political power.
That's what the Romans meant by it, and that's still what it means in this context.
The deep state, as conceptualized, is a conspiracy because it's an agreement by members of the administration to act in a way that subvert the powers granted to elected officials and create a parallel informal power structure.
It is probably not a conspiracy in the legal sense, but that is completely irrelevant.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link