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 agree with your assessment that playing tribal politics in the justice/pardon system is capital-B Bad.
In general, I am kind of opposed to a pardon process controlled by the executive, because I see them as more tribal than a jury. At least require bipartisan support for a pardon or something. 25 years seem excessive and politically motivated, pardon at the earliest opportunity also seems politically motivated. An early pardon after five years or something would be much different.
I always find it amusing that Germany has (on paper, at least) stronger self defense laws than the US, where there is generally a duty to retreat in public spaces. But even we have the concept of deliberately having produced a situation where you need to employ self-defense may negate your claim to self-defense.
For me, a lot would hinge on circumstantial facts. Was that barrier on a route which Perry took for some reason, or was he intentionally going to the barrier itching for any excuse to shoot someone? Did he try to report the barrier to the police before driving up to it?
If two people are both itching for a fight, and one kills the other, a manslaughter sentence for the survivor may in general provide good incentives. Similarly, if Gang A illegally occupies a building, and Gang B decides to take a stroll on the sidewalk of that building to provoke a confrontation and it comes to a shootout, I would generally advocate manslaughter charges for the survivors on both sides.
Edit: my other take is that if (a) the police was aware that there was an illegal road block by armed men and (b) they decided to wait that out, then whoever made that decision failed hard in their duty to keep the peace. Keeping the peace could have meant telling the BLMs to clear the roadblock, using a water gun vehicle to clear the blockade or even just setting up their own police roadblock a bit upstream (under the fiction that the BLM road block was an approved demonstration).
The pardon was not a unilateral act by governor Abbott. The Texas board of pardons and paroles recommended it and governor Abbott decided to sign off on it.
While I have no doubt that the board of pardons and paroles are republicans, they’re not national level political figures.
More options
Context Copy link
This is just handing over control of whatever an aggressor wants to them. It's already bad when the government allows Gang A to occupy the building. It's worse when the government punishes someone for not respecting Gang A's claim; now the building is de facto Gang As property (even if the title was not some third party but Gang B itself)
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link