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 -
Someone honest about limits of their knowledge.
At this point I think you're deliberately misrepresenting what I said. Here, again:
This does not boil down to "I just want people to be nice". Can you at least consciously try to paraphrase the above in your words, in a way that you think I'll recognize as my own views?
That's pretty reductive, but baby steps I suppose. Yes, I did say getting the small things right is more important that answering the grand moral questions, no?
Can you give an example?
Generally, the sub (and FC) is more partisan right-wing than I am on the topics you highlighted, free speech, not firing people, tolerance for differing opinions among friends.
How is that being not nice because they started it?
A common sentiment in the sub is “When we had power, we gave them free speech. Now that they have power, they deny it to us. We won’t make that mistake again.“
I feel like my worldview is close enough to FC's that I can answer for what he said (excluding the time period where he self-admittedly was in a dark place), but I'm not going to answer for "the sub".
Other than that I'm going to need something more specific. I think I had a conversation semi-recently where I defended conservative parents banning progressive books in schools, so depending on how you meant it you could fit that into "not making that mistake again", but in the same conversation I defended the right for progressives to do the same in their communities with conservative books, so I would disagree this is "not being nice because they started it".
Are you denying this is an official @FCfromSSC positionTM ? If anything, he's even more against free speech, ie, 'it was always a sham and could never have worked no matter the opponent'. Now in practice I believe he is less anti-free speech than the woke.
Nevertheless, this is a major problem for your argument. Because firstly people disagree on what the seemingly universal norm of ‘common sense decency’(small-h honor of lee and rommel) even is, and secondly, free speech to me is actually a ‘big question’, so the distinction you’re trying to make, and the world where we all just stick to your small standards, can’t exist.
Depending on what you mean by it, I am against free speech, and believe it was always a sham, which is why I said I am going to need specifics. What I'm denying is that this constitutes "not being nice to them" because I don't think either of us is asking for anything we'd deny to the progressives.
But somehow, in this entire thread, no one attacked Lee or Rommel on their personal conduct.
Nah. This is the deconstructivist "X is a social construct / has fuzzy boundaries therefore X does not exist" argument, and it's pretty clearly false. Few things in the physical world, let alone human interactions, are clearly delineated, but that does not make them non-existent or meaningless.
Why then did you cite ‘the censorship’ as one of the ‘little things’ that justify your moral superiority to the woke?
I think I did. Obeying your superiors, fighting for your home country are some of the 'little things' I object to.
Because I don't think the same rules apply to adults engaging in politics and to the mandatory education system that children go through
Because they cite science as the source of their legitimacy, and you can't do science while cutting off avenues of research
Because they refuse to codify it, and rely on underhanded tactics like whisper networks and blackballing
Nowhere in the conversation have you mentioned that you're using a similar framework to mine, and in fact you were attacking the very idea of it. So I'm sure you'll understand why I have trouble believing you actually believe the above.
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