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’ve got a couple of points/counterpoints:
Everyone in the world wants to look like a European in practice. Arabs, Indians, Latin Americans explicitly so, but blacks- both locals and Africans- seem to wish for more European features regularly and what I’ve heard from white guys who lived in Asia indicates the same dynamics at play. It doesn’t surprise me that primitives give whites the deference that very attractive/imposing people often get.
I don’t think ‘hostility towards white people from non-white people’ is the best summary of the culture war- there’s a dynamic where one tribe of whites tries to turn non-whites against the other tribe of whites and it’s working a lot less well than the median motteizean seems to believe. IME African American hostility towards whites is mostly directed at the blue tribe and if they mean to refer to the red tribe directly they would say rednecks. And, of course, every racial group would prefer a white manager- of either tribe- to a manager from a different racial group. It is very rare for a majority black workplace to have a hispanic boss or Vice versa, but both have white bosses regularly if there isn’t a member of their own group. It just seems minorities might prefer a higher relative status to whites, but not at the expense of a different minority group having a higher status relative to them.
I think your colonization narrative leaves out that euro technological and social organization gave a huge advantage, and that Europeans managed to develop this advantage over societies with in-theory higher HBD like China. In 1000 AD European dominance over China looked implausible; in 1700 it was practically assured. European methods of organizing themselves and doing things was the main reason for dominating the globe, although I suppose Spaniards conquering mesoamerican primitives could’ve happened regardless.
How exactly would you describe the European way of socialisation?
And how would you describe the Chinese way of socialisation?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link