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 don't really think that's a fair characterization. You mentioned for example distracting the base with empty immigration promises. But wait. Who killed the 2013 Gang of Eight immigration reform bill that passed the Senate and died in the House on Boehner's watch? A serious bipartisan effort that passed 68-32? A real, not-vaporware bill that both gave a path to citizenship alongside border security improvements and expanded employer verification? Yes, short sighted right wing House members under Boehner's weak speakership. Sound familiar? Meanwhile, I don't see a strong correlation between centrists and war hawks. Some prominent Iran hawks for example include a wide range of Democrats and Republicans both and of various polarities. You have Ted Cruz and Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton and McCain historically on the GOP side, to name a few. Hardly close allies.
The current feelings are largely, I think, largely a reaction to the Republican Congress largely sitting on its hands out of spite during the early Trump administration. The refusal to fund the border wall was especially egregious, in my opinion. This lack of accomplishment with a unified government firmly convinced a lot of people that the Congressional Republicans did not really support the things they claimed to.
More options
Context Copy link
Blech 🤮
This is exactly what I don't want: Republicans who work with Democrats on sweetheart deals that include "path to amnesty" (now) and "border security improvement" (later!). But maybe you aren't familiar with the history of Congress's empty promises to fix the issue.
None of these guys are actually conservatives aligned with the base, they just play one on TV. Lindsey Graham and Tom Cotton especially are the worst fakers. Ted Cruz is nominally more conservative, because he's so unlikeable that this is his only play. But otherwise all of these guys are the exact type I described: they will sell the base out on issues we care about so they can get another crack at bombing Iran, which is the serious, bipartisan compromise.
I don't want serious bipartisan deals. I want the right-wing Obamacare, where the whole party gives me what I voted for even if it's controversial. I want the right-wing Nancy Pelosi, who will hold half of Congress against a hostile President and Senate and not blink, and nobody goes on TV and says Pelosi is being irresponsible and needs to be adult in the room and give up every point. I don't want Repubublicans that appear serious to you, a centrist Moderate Biden-voting Dem -- not because I'm mad at you personally or acting out of angry animus, but because I'm tired of electing Republicans who appear more reasonable to the other guy than to me.
And that's why the Republicans can't win. If they set out a hard line against the Democrats, the TV will say they are irresponsible and intransigent. If the Democrats set out a hard line against the Republicans, the TV will say the Republicans are irresponsible and intransigent.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link