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 -
The guy is on video saying "The Capitol IS the Enemy." The guy's sermons are just ridiculous and only make sense in hindsight given what happened the next day. I've never seen anything remotely similar being said by others and it's such a goofball thing to say his fellow diehard MAGA/Trump supporters were weirded out and regularly called him a Fed and other names.
Given the mountain of publicly available evidence and how the guy fits a perfect caricature of how the government and their media mouthpieces wanted to portray Jan6 (an Oath Keeper leader on video making statements to go IN TO the Capitol which is OUR Enemy and fighting with cops), his wildly disparate treatment for 2.5 years is preposterous to me without an explanation that he was working for the fed gov in some capacity and acting on their behest in some capacity.
you wouldn't be on a DC jury
given what we've seen from DC juries and DC judges, if this was charged against other Jan6 defendants he would be convicted
I totally agree with you here, but I'd just like to point out that
I was assuming this would be from the perspective of a prosecutor... and I agree that they wouldn't let someone like me handle a case like this even if I was.
Ah, I understand now. This crystalized a point I was trying to make but you gave me words to organize it and do so concisely: To me, it's a waste of time/missing the point to engage in technical legal arguments about any particular charge, elements, or hair splitting about interpretations because what we see in the Jan6 cases is prosecutors, judges, and jurors in DC demonstrably do not care. I can give example after example after example of statutory interpretation stretched beyond their breaking point and historical precedent being tossed out the window in order to get "the bad guys."
Every argument which others have posted in defense of Jan6 prosecution or Epps's wildly disparate treatment has already been argued by decent lawyers in some Jan6 cases both in trial and before trial and almost all of the time these arguments were rejected. It's extremely black-pilling to me having spent years of my life in the legal field including in criminal defense to see these clownish showtrials in the Nation's capital.
And the saddest thing about it is these precedents, and lines, and laws weren't crossed and tossed to imprison Satan himself; they were tossed to destroy regular productive otherwise good (even if you disagree with their conduct and their politics here) people with no criminal history in their entire lives.
It's simply incredible to me that anyone continues to give these actors and this system the benefit of the doubt. Sorry for the rant.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link