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 -
So
1) You claim "the political system that perpetuates our current ruling class will be so severely damaged..." is equivalent to "the government system cracks and fails"
2) You claim the inevitable result is something materially worse
Therefore
3) By logical implication your position is that the current ruling class should remain in power, and those who oppose them should just suck it up.
It should not be any surprise that those who are not happy with the current ruling class are not really open to this conclusion, and are therefore probably not on board with at least one of the premises.
No U.
Seriously, I'm happy to debate this but, you're not really putting forward much of an argument. No, "u guyz r so dum" does not count (and if you insist it does, again so does the counterargument of "no u").
Yes, it's amazing what you can prove by assuming the group you're arguing against consists primarily of inbred redneck hicks. I too can prove amazing things by assuming the establishment is ran by satanic pedophile 72-gendered purple hairs.
But the bulk of the group running the country now is posting cringe memes about race and gender (I mean, I can probably find literal politicians and high-level execs posting cringe), that does not imply the show is being run by literal bottom of the barrel tmblrinas.
What is better, a very competent person enacting a very evil agenda, or an incompetent person attempting to enact a good agenda?
If somehow whoever got into office did exactly nothing, it would still be 100% better than somebody getting into office and continuing existing policy by Biden, Clinton, Bush, etc.
As it stands, bad people are the ones who have the most to lose.
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