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 -
Ok I swear I don't just get up every morning and ask, "How can I be schizo today?"
But in one day I saw the following two things:
https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1731747916568727610
Among the masses of migrants flowing across the southern border each day, a whole line of Chinese nationals, military aged men, automatically standing at "parade rest" as one reply pointed out.
And this:
https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1731808064108372245
Senator Dick Durbin making a speech in favor of allowing illegal immigrants into the military.
My schizo sense is tingling and saying that Nefarious Forces are Intentionally using the Power of Money to plan Bad Things for America.
Or, since this space has norms in favor of speaking plainly and against Darkly Hinting, let me put it more directly:
Is China bribing American politicians to allow Chinese soldiers to become American soldiers to conquer the USA via military coup?
I think the only reason the US doesn't do what it needs to do about the border is because doing what it takes to actually solve the border crisis would make America look bad in international affairs. Russia and China would have tons of propaganda pictures and stories about how horrible the US is, and the left wing press in the US would be happy to help. The empire and securing global markets is what is most important to American elites, and illegal migration just isn't a huge issue to people who can afford to live in nice areas and send their kids to good schools. The only way to stop illegal immigration would be to replace the entire US government with people that don't give a shit if securing the border makes them look bad and hurts the US's standing abroad. They'd just tell other government to fuck off if they tried criticizing them about it and jail leftists who try to stir up shit domestically. But we don't live in that world so nothing can reasonably be done about it.
That might be part of the reason, but I think another big part of the reason is that US citizens are not going to go pick berries, work in slaughterhouses, or do yard work for $7/hr. Illegal immigrants in the US are an important part of the economy.
Wouldn't a better idea be to fix the US economy so it doesn't require importing countless poor people to work unpleasant jobs reliant on the fact that they aren't here legally and therefore have no right to a liveable wage?
A better idea from whose perspective? The cheap labor benefits American consumers, and the wage being paid is more than said importee would get in their home nation presumably.
So both sides have reasons not to "fix" it. From a free market perspective its a win win.
Well from my perspective, for starters. Is that your perspective then, a free market perspective? Because that wasn't the impression I got from any of your other posts. Other posts I've read of yours gave me the impression you would oppose the exploitation of people living in poverty so Americans can keep their suvs and dollar cheeseburgers.
Also I recall a different response the last time America got a bunch of cheap laborers and gave them just enough to make them better off than they would have been in their home nation.
I am a neo-liberal with authoritarian leanings i would say.
I think exploitation often depends on whether the people being exploited are happy with it.
Having said that i am also sympathetic to the idea that neo-liberal free markets need to be directed and regulated by the state. I think off shoring manufacturing has caused a lot of hardship for working class Americans in the Rust Belt et al.
So probably my position would be importing cheap labourers is ok as long as they are treated reasonably well and are themselves happy with their wages, which i guess is close to the free market position, or comparative advantage. But that manufacturing should be on-shored for the good of the American populace even though that will also raise prices, because the impact on poor Americans is disproportionate.
So I guess, let market forces reign but with a heavy state hand regulating them, for an optimum balance of economic and human thriving.
I would be on board with this if we weren't talking about illegal, undocumented, non-citizens. I would actually be ok with indentured servitude if it was between consenting adults. But the system as it stands seems almost designed to be abused.
Sure, some kind of easy legal immigration for low paid workers would probably be better. But I don't see that being politically feasible currently.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I'd go so far as to say none of that is necessary, if the laborer knows what they're getting into.
I'd hope I count as a skilled worker, but I can also accept "cheap", since my wages in the UK would be a pittance compared to the US, an electrician in the US can easily make triple what a junior doctor does in the former. Further, I'm not remotely happy with said salary as provided by a monopsony employer, and I think calling the conditions NHS doctors labor under as "treated well" to be a farce.
None of that prevents me from leaving, I still consider it a step up, albeit a modest one, from being a doctor in India.
I'm also entirely OK with less skilled workers, such as those in construction or domestic care, who go to places with less than stellar rights and conditions like the Middle East from even less stellar, not even planetary, conditions as found in the Indian subcontinent. Would it be nice if they were paid better and treated better? Sure, but believe me that the silent majority will accept that as a reasonable tradeoff when it means they make 5 to 10 times what they could back home, thus having actual savings while sending remittances back home.
I'd know, I was one of the doctors at a Qatari Visa Center, and there were plenty of people who were eager to resume their posts after their visas expired and they had to come back. I'm sure many of them were mislead by touts about how cushy it was there, but they're not the norm.
In other words, as long as people make the tradeoff with a decent level of insight, and ideally it's a step up from where they began, I can hardly begrudge them their movements.
One of the reasons why I don't call myself an outright Libertarian despite being very sympathetic to that position is that I see clear utility from having states around to do things that the free market doesn't (as well as fuck things up, but my position is that we should find where we can maximize benefits and minimize downsides from having both).
Especially in matters of national security, you need to have a big stick to prevent companies from selling out or doing end-runs, such as Nvidia after the executive order banning export of high-end GPUs to China.
Sadly, while I sometimes wish otherwise, governments are usually good to have around, not that I'd mind less of it in many places.
I actually have sympathy for Libertarians myself. I think their positions are generally logical, consistent and principled. Unfortunately much like with communism, i don't think their ideas will actually work in practice with actual people.
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