site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 20, 2024

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.

8
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What's the point of it all if the productive among us are going to be forced to grind away at jobs to support the non-productive and anti-productive in a lifestyle of low-class luxury?

Status, yachts, yachts that have little support yachts, bigger houses, some rare people are motivated by improving the human condition as a terminal goal.

Is low-class luxury a joke? Do you hate your job so much that simply not having to work is living in luxury, even if it's just your basic needs being met? I assume you derive some kind of fulfillment from your work outside of a paycheck, but I suppose I don't know who you are or what you do.

The thought of AIs asking that question is one of the things driving AI fears, but somehow it's become anathema for humans to ask.

I fear you asking it for the same reasons I fear AIs asking it. I'll note that anytime you cut taxes or welfare I'll benefit disproportionately, so none of this is out of a personal interest.

I have little status, no yacht (as my tagline avers), and certainly no yacht with a little support yacht. Working so other people (who have yachts with little support yachts) can implement their vision of improving the human condition does not appeal to me.

Do you hate your job so much that simply not having to work is living in luxury, even if it's just your basic needs being met?

Of course not having to work is luxury.

I fear you asking it for the same reasons I fear AIs asking it.

The reason to fear the AIs asking it is the answer would be to stop supporting the humans and use the resources for their own betterment. As a productive human, the equivalent answer for productive people -- to stop supporting the unproductive -- should not be nearly so scary. In the fully-automated AI world, the AIs are the slaves to the humans. In the welfare world, the productive are slaves to the unproductive.

Working so other people (who have yachts with little support yachts) can implement their vision of improving the human condition does not appeal to me.

I'm more and more curious what you do now, given that short of you owning your own business you're certainly in the thrall of some yachterati or another. Besides, we're both arguing over the betterment of the human condition right now, unless your perspective is driven strictly through self-interest.

Of course not having to work is luxury.

In that case, should we abolish retirement and force the elderly to work? End school and send the children to work in the Tesla mines?

In the fully-automated AI world, the AIs are the slaves to the humans. In the welfare world, the productive are slaves to the unproductive.

These are not binary outcomes, but a spectrum. We're several steps down the road to the fully-automated world already; it seems foolish for the productivity gains to go entirely to capital and force others to live in hovels.

Not to mention in your model, the lowliest of slaves own mansions full of servants and cars while the slavemasters wallow in garbage in a drug-induced fugue state. I wonder if their masters wish they could be slaves, too.

I'm more and more curious what you do now, given that short of you owning your own business you're certainly in the thrall of some yachterati or another.

Eh, I'm pretty sure he isn't really interested in improving the human condition and would be happier spending money on a better yacht. But that's not why I work for him; I work for him for money for me.

Of course not having to work is luxury.

In that case, should we abolish retirement and force the elderly to work?

Have I said I want to abolish luxury? I have no problem with working, saving, and retiring on one's savings. That works a lot better when the proceeds of the working aren't funneled to the never-working.