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 -
Some of us have children and growth is great for a nation.
Unless you were on the Mayflower there is a pretty good chance you were not the first person to live in your city.
My ancestors settled in the absolutely barren unwanted land in South Dakota. None of them showed up in Manhattan and demanded that somebody build them a house.
The myth of consensual housing
Purchaser: I consent!
Developer: I consent!
South Dakotan: I don't!
The question being discussed is, can people build housing on their own land? It seems a bit rich to cosplay the rugged frontiersman at the city council meeting to prevent people from exercising their god-given property rights.
What are you talking about?
I'm saying that our system of government allows people to vote on things. If the people who live in a town vote not to allow single family zoned lots to be turned into multifamily zoned lots, then they get to do that.
Similarly if the people who want to build giant condos want to build them, literally all they have to do is build them somewhere else that wants them.
This idea that a collective of people can decide what to do with the collective land that they own is pretty old.
I was responding to this:
I don't live in South Dakota, and never did. Eventually my ancestors moved away from there into various cities.
If you want to build condos, then I'm begging you: do it, but stop complaining because the place you want to build them doesn't want you to.
The problem is that people keep seething when even marginal changes are made to zoning, and people who want to build not even condos but somewhat smaller houses have to fight tooth and nail to exercise their property rights.
They don't want the condos in their neighborhood. Go build them somewhere else, and make the glorious condo utopia that the condo people imagine.
I don't understand - the people voted and the law got changed. Again, we're not talking about condos here. People have a right to exercise their property rights. I bet if I got together with my neighbors we could agree that my other neighbor's lot should be demolished and turned into a park but that is illegal too.
By the way, people are absolutely assblasted about the glorious condo utopia too.
Yeah those people are stupid.
My original response was to somebody saying
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
Allowing individuals to built multi family on their private property is hardly demanding someone builds a house.
Happy for you that you have no desire to leave the land of your ancestors but many people do and we should have land use policies that allow for building.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
One of the implications of the housing crisis is that many people who do want children are never going to be able to have them. It is extremely expensive to live even by yourself, let alone to support and provide for any children you may have.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link