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 -
There has been a century and a half long propaganda campaign against market regulation. Your using some of the ideas they came up with a century ago that have long since been neutered and debunked.
The pricing stuff is extra silly because you can talk yourself into thinking there is a monopoly or collusion based on any price change. Price goes down, ah it's the beginning stage of predatory pricing. Price goes up, ah it's the end stage of predatory pricing. Price stays the same ah they must be colluding because they don't have to change their prices.
It's the perfect example of reasoning backwards from a conclusion.
Intellectual property is generally only possible through centralized regulatory regimes. Prior to global trade markets it was more about trade secrets and being first to market was the main benefit of innovation. I am much more sympathetic to the argument that IP is one of the good use cases of centralized bureaucracy. But it's ridiculous to blame the results of abuse of centralized bureaucracy on markets.
Walmarts are still cheap. They are still convenient. They do face competition with online ordering.
"Walmart complaints" often say so much about the priorities of someone complaining. Wal Mart is mostly fine and doesn't do anything wrong. Most economists, even left leaning ones are on board with that. They do have a PR problem in politics though. And it's great to appeal to voters when complaining about Walmart.
However, you either ignored the rest of my list or didn't read it. Third bullet points was "local regulation". If a city or locality wants to ban Walmart that seems fine to me. I'll try to avoid living there, or fight the ordinance if it comes up locally. You have not provided any mechanism by which a centralized bureaucracy could even fix this supposed "problem", in fact they often do the opposite! A centralized bureaucracy is more likely to tell all localities "no if Walmart follows these specific rules then you have to allow them in".
If Walmart is your biggest complaint you should be agreeing with me, not getting hung up on an ideological fight.
More options
Context Copy link