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 -
And the answer, of course, is "never" because, as you note, it's always some unspecified "someone" who "shoots one of these judges/bureaucrats/politicians." Nobody's going to be the first to stick their own neck out; they're going to wait for someone else to get the ball rolling, and join in only once it looks like it isn't going to be nipped in the bud (which it would be).
Plus, to be anything more than useless lone-wolf terrorism would require organization — solid, pre-established coordination — and, as a Disqus commenter over at Instapundit put it, we've been breeding such things out of the Right (in favor of "I just want to grill" passivism and "don't tread on me", "I don't answer to nobody; if someone orders me to breathe I'll suffocate myself to death to spite them!" individualism) for decades.
The example of Ted Stevens suggests otherwise.
I'm... not so optimistic. I think people here have spent too long in white-collar environments. While I'd expect that anything going hot will involve more garbage person emotional spasms than cold-blooded planning, a serious and dedicated red team attacker with even a moderate amount of certain infrastructure knowledge could cause massive amounts of deaths, infrastructure costs, and/or economic costs, and it only takes a couple highly-reported bad actors for the processes to become Common Knowledge as something that can happen.
That passivism and atomic individuality makes the low-capability people a lot more prone to They Kept Using Discord problems, but despite the increasingly common progressive assumptions, not everyone in that field is low-capability.
That's still not enough to take control over large geographic locations (or even a CHAZ), if that's what you mean, but not everyone's going to have the same idea of what 'winning' means. The sort that take shutting down large parts of New York City are just, you know, not mine.
All of which would turn everyone against them and bring further crackdowns upon the entire Red Tribe.
And all it takes is making sufficiently severe examples of those bad actors (and their family, friends, and general associates) to make it Common Knowledge as something not worth trying.
"Capability" is useless without coordination. The lone actor accomplishes nothing. Only large, well-coordinated groups can get anything done.
You gotta watch how finely you atomize the population -- small well coordinated groups can do a lot of damage, and there are quite a lot of those floating around the US. The kind that don't take in new members, and if moved to action are likely to motivate other such groups to (independently) do the same.
Everybody knows how terrorist cells work, and America is full of cells currently engaged in beer & fishing type activities -- ideally this can remain their focus.
Define "small"
Not if you exclude the Fed honeytraps, there aren't. Small groups, yes, but meaningful coordination is something us Red Tribers are fundamentally, constitutionally incapable of. If a group is "well-coordinated," it can only be because someone on the Federal payroll is providing said coordination.
Not my experience, given some of the myths I encounter people believing about Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.
Only if you count a bunch of fat, out-of-shape beer-swilling losers who hang out occasionally as a "terror cell"
Because those are the only activities they're capable of, and always will be the only activities they ever engage in.
We're completely useless, powerless, and hopeless, and I've yet to see someone provide any believable evidence to the contrary.
Anything between two people and a platoon or so I guess.
That's just it -- I'm talking about 'groups' of people in which everyone involved knows and trusts each other entirely, and new members are not invited. Former service members would be a good example, but for me there are single digit people that I've known since childhood who are definitely not feds and could be relied upon to help me out with whatever. 'Overturning the State' is not on our agenda, but I can well imagine social groups in which this might not be the case.
lol -- tell me you've never held a blue collar job without coming out and saying it.
I didn't say they were terror cells; they aren't, and it would be best to keep it that way. That's my whole point.
I have a blue collar job and agree with him. If we could organize politically our wages wouldn't be stagnating as our bosses replace everyone they can with illegals.
If we weren't hopelessly inept at organizing, how did construction workers end up being forced to take "male privilege" training sessions? If we were capable those responsible would already be dangling from cranes and meat hooks by now.
The stories I could tell you about my coworkers who've uncomplainingly slaved away for decades for people who despise them...
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link