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 -
I think the there is an opening along the culture war’s line of contact in the zone of religious behavior. Specifically, that the non-left has the opportunity to take ground among the growing percentage of persons who do not believe in god.
I assume that there is general agreement on the following points:
religiosity, in general, is on the decline. Pew’s longitudinal religious landscape study tracks associated metrics, as do many others.
many individuals and groups are experiencing negative outcomes due to the overall decline in religiosity. There is the often talked about crisis of meaning, the declining birthrates particularly among the non-religious, etc.
putting aside the question of whether or not the leftism is a religion (a proposition I support), that the general decline in religiosity is broadly favorable to leftists.
Taken the above as weak, but broadly agreed upon, I would also argue that, similar to @erwgv3g34 post on Scott’s Kolmogorov Complicity and the Parable of Lightning, the cat is largely out of the proverbial bag on the question of whether or not any particular diety or similar set of theological claims is true. To be clear, I don’t think that every single person will inevitably believe that god doesn’t exist. I do think, however, that there is sufficient atheism, and scientific thinking and knowledge in our society that significantly many people cannot be convinced to believe or to feign belief.
The avowedly religious probably think that this state of affairs is an unalloyed, net negative, but is it? Returning to the generally agreed upon points at the top, there is a growing number of people who don’t believe in god, but are suffering and seeking out the type of benefits that religion classically provides. From the perspective of these atheists, all religions are obviously false in the sense that god doesn’t exist, but religiosity is still important and desirable.
Accordingly, I think there is a lot of ground to be gained by offering these people a way to participate in religion that doesn’t, in Scott’s words, make them insist that lightning comes after thunder. I think there is an opportunity for something like a Christian Atheism, where people can feel connected to the obviously Christian origins of American culture, can participate in group rituals and be supported by a moral framework that they obviously desire, but without the humiliation of professing that thunder comes first.
Is there a good analogy for something like this? I’m not sure. Secular Judaism is the model that comes to mind but I’m sure there are other examples.
Is this optimal from the perspective of the faithful? No. But so what? The devout are hemorrhaging adherents and the only other game in town is the enemy’s.
If I was the Catholic Church or [insert non-Catholic denominational leadership], I would be funding such groups as hard as possible and conditioning my political donations on candidates plugging the idea in their stump speeches. Obviously, I would prefer them to come to Jesus. But if they aren’t coming to Jesus anyway, surely I would prefer to funnel those people into a group where they can proudly and honestly proclaim that ‘of course Jesus isn’t real, but that’s not the point; the 10 commandments have served our people well for 2 thousand years because they work and you should follow them too.’
I think a well crafted message along these lines could be highly effective in the current environment.
Yeah, big winner there. "Let's all be lukewarm vaguely-Protestant non-churchgoers who just want to be respectable and go along with whatever is currently the Zeitgeist". Not that this hasn't happened; a lot of "go to Mass on Sunday" Catholics happily fell away when the social force of conformism round that disappeared (look at the vocations crisis).
You want people to sign up to a church-that's-not-a-church, but why would they do that? If they want to join something, they'll join a sports club or hobby group or something that gives them a sense of enjoyment in return for participation and effort, not "out of your limited after work free time, go to this meeting to agree over how there should be more litter bins on the streets".
Also the Ten Commandments are being edited down to fit in with social mores; no of course we don't approve of murder, but abortion is not murder. Euthanasia is just mercy and death with dignity. No adultery? Well me and Mrs. Jones have a thing going on, we both know it's wrong, but it's much too strong to let it go now. Anyway, divorce is now legal and why are you trying to force me to stay in a dead marriage? Lying? Oh come on, everyone tells fibs. Don't steal? Shoplifting is a victimless crime, that's what insurance is for. No taking the name of the Lord in vain? Jesus H. Christ on a fucking crutch and the bicycle he rode in on, what kind of language police crap is this? The New Commandments are pretty much Racism Bad, Phobes Bad, Capitalism Bad. (Orange Man Bad optional).
EDIT: Isn't there already Christian Atheism in America, in the guise of the Civic Religion? Fourth of July is the sacred holiday, Washington and Lincoln the blessed saints, anecdotes like Washington and the cherry tree being the new Golden Legend (and indeed nearly deliberately created to be so), we are the shining city on a hill, exceptionalism, the Heavenly Father (carefully not getting any more denominational than that) has blessed us, God (of your own personal choice or value system) bless America, hail the flag our sacred relic and emblem!
But that sort of patriotism is now bad and wicked and evil, isn't it? I think the new civic religion is growing up to be Pride Month our sacred holy days, Pride Flags in all their novel iterations the sacred emblems, Happy Holidays the festivals and feast days where we worship at the altars of Mammon, the shopping malls and online stores (Black Friday and Cyber Monday as Lenten/Advent replacements) etc. People make jokes about the blessed martyr St. Floyd but I think that's truer than you know. You have Secular Religion Christian Atheism already, you just don't recognise that yet.
Related to the American civic religion, I've sometimes wondered why the people who don't want all that actual-Christianity stuff but still want rituals and history and a framework for continence and self-development and community don't gravitate more towards Freemasonry, which would in fact provide all that. There's a requirement to believe in a Creator but my understanding is that it doesn't feature too prominently.
Anyone else old enough to remember the Flintstones cartoon (the original, not the movie remakes) and how Fred and Barney were members of the Loyal Order of Water Buffaloes? I think that, for a period, groups like this were the kind of alternate community for ritual and belonging in a secular sense for people, as they slowly transitioned away from church-going being more than the social obligation but before we got full atomised individualism.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link