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 -
This isn't to say other exonerating evidence or evidence which makes Epps look better doesn't exist or that a successful defense on the merits isn't possible (if we're going to entertain the fiction that the DC court system isn't laughably biased and incapable of giving Jan6 defendants a fair trial) , but it also existed for a thousand+ other people who are Jan6 defendants (more being added regularly) and yet that exonerating evidence is actively hidden by the state. There are people who have served their entire sentences only to find out when they're released from the pen that dozens of minutes of exonerating evidence was never given to them for their cases.
But not with Epps! The government didn't stop to collect all the evidence with everyone else (seriously, they claim this as the excuse for why they didn't hand over exonerating evidence to charged defendants attempting to appeal their cases) , but when it comes to Epps, geez, they have to work slowly and deliberatively and give him every benefit of the doubt. As far as I know, Epps is the only person who was interviewed by the DOJ before he was charged and the only person whose side of the story that day is even used in the pushed narrative at the time or even now.
When it comes to Epps, well by golly gosh, the government is ready to rush to his defense! The corporate media is ready to rush to his defense! The laughable joke that was the Jan 6 committee was ready to rush to his defense to engage in a performance of obviously scripted exchanges with parts somehow finding a way to corporate press so there could be ready articles in the NYT and other places proclaiming everything is just fine, this is all normal, please let go of this Epps thing.
He gets 2.5 years of time, soft-ball interviews with mass corporate media, obviously leaked information in "closed door" meetings to media mouthpieces, a former Perkins Couie lawyer to defend him, and a misdemeanor charge by information with a ready set plea deal hearing a couple days later, another ready NYT article proclaiming he is being held accountable and definitely not a fed and please let this go or you're a bad conspiracy theorist person, and this all happens a month before Ryan Samsel (the guy he talked into his ear) and another guy related but I forget his name are put on trial ?
As far as I can tell, there is one other person who was charged by information with a basic 1752(a)(2) misdemeanor charge and that person is Isaiah Giddings, a member of the Proud Boys who is also widely suspected of being connected to the government. Evidence against Giddings is tiny in comparison to Epps.
Few, if any, other Jan6 defendants were given this treatment. We're all just left to speculate why and told to ignore our lying eyes because this is all so normal, totally legal, and part of the process.
More options
Context Copy link