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 -
What always trips me up about sentiments like this is that I agree with them... and that's a big part of why I'm a prison abolitionist, you can't trust the justice system to deliver real justice and shouldn't premise everything on it's ability to do so.
But most people expressing these sentiments are not prison abolitionists, many of them among Republicans want to be tougher on crime with harsher sentencing and so forth, and I don't understand the epistemic state that lets someone dismiss the justice system as obviously corrupt when it works against someone they like, but reliable enough to throw people in jail for life willy-nilly otherwise.
You straightforwardly don't, though. The fact that you have a critique of an element of the justice system and I have a critique of an element of the justice system doesn't mean that those critiques share any meaningful overlap, whether in focus, hypothesized mechanisms, evidence presented, standards by which that evidence is measured, proposed solutions or standards by which the effects of those solutions should be assessed.
I could, as you have, claim to likewise be in favor of prison abolition, on the understanding that I and people like myself will simply band together to punish criminality directly through immediate and severe violence against perpetrators rather than deferring to sclerotic, compromised and increasingly incompetent institutions. After all, if there's no jail to send criminals to any more, than naively one might assume that there's no jail to send those who simply beat or shoot criminals to, either. Only, I don't think this is actually what you have in mind by the term "prison abolition", and it seems to me that blurring the distinction between our positions and values only generates misunderstandings and frustration without advancing meaningful conversation.
I don't recall you ever making a case for prison abolition, though I'd certainly be interested in discussing it if you ever chose to. As with your recent post on race, I'm interested in the discussion, but that requires an actual willingness to discuss, rather than limiting oneself to laments over discussion that isn't happening. I've provided some examples of why I consider the justice systems deployed against Trump to be compromised; if you've got a similar list for why you consider the justice system deployed against ordinary murderers and thieves to be compromised, I'd be interested in seeing it.
Whoever you reesponded to, their post is still marked as filtered, and I can't see it.
It was darwin. He must have finally triggered something in the site code.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link