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 -
For some reason this problem only seems to come up with one specific guy. McConnell isn't buried in criminal accusations; neither is Desantis, Abbott, or pretty much any other major Republican leadership figure. Maybe Trump really is just unusually shady?
Hillary faced calls for criminal consequences for her emails as secretary of state. Biden also inappropriately retained classified information and faced a criminal investigation.
But yeah, I'll bite the bullet, Trump is unusually shady.
Yeah. I mean he ordered the assassination of a fifteen year old in a cafe. Oh wait no that was Obama.
Oh well Trump must have tortured a lot of people. No wait that was W.
Well Trump must have sicced his DOJ on parents for exercising their constitutional rights with respect to school boards. No that was Joe.
No one else has done anything comparable to January 6th
If January 6, 2021 was the day Trump's second term was confirmed and had leftists behaved identically to the red hats, people here wouldn't even bring it up, because they'd have no reason to bring it up, because there's nothing unusual about leftists interrupting political processes.
Statements like this reinforce the grand hoax. There was nothing unusual about the day, its only unique quality was the right engaging in a particularly visible protest. It wasn't transgressive, the left behaves far worse far more often; it wasn't a threat, they would have brought guns.
Last week the country and world saw Joseph Biden is the de jure but not de facto President of the United States. The party that has branded itself on "democracy" shows no felt obligation to clarify to their base the man they voted for is not the actual Executive. It goes without saying they will lie about anything and the significance of 1/6/2021 is one such lie. Sadly it's not their worst.
More options
Context Copy link
Comparable to Trump's (lack of) action on that day? His watching TV and idly complaining that his supporters looked slovenly?
I am mostly referring to his procedural attempt to overturn the election by having Pence refuse to certify the results. But yeah. Refusing to issue any kind of statement asking his supporters to stand down while they invaded the capitol was also indefensible.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Trump probably doesn't get immunity for his acts on January 6th under this decision. Unfortunately for the prosecution, since those acts consist of Tweets containing clearly protected speech, which do not urge violence, that's going to be tough to pass Constitutional muster for other reasons.
As for whether anyone has done anything comparable, I'd be very surprised if no President has urged on a rally by supporters. Whether any has told them to go home after the rally turned to a riot, I don't know.
This is a ridiculous way to describe January 6
I am not describing January 6 that way. I am describing Trump's speech starting at 11am that way. The riot had not yet started; it started during the speech but Trump didn't know about it, since he was at the Ellipse, not the Capitol. The breach of the Capitol building wasn't until 2pm.
He did, several times. From the Newsweek timeline.
More options
Context Copy link
Why? What specific elements justify stronger language?
The special status applied to J6 was cemented with deliberate lies about the violence committed by the protestors. We know now that they did not, in fact, kill police officers, or anyone for that matter. We know that there was a complete failure of preparation and policing on the part of the government, which made crowd control completely ineffective. We can be pretty sure that there were many plainclothes government agents and informants in the crowd, encouraging others to break the law. We know that the police, lacking manpower, began waving the crowds through, and then that security forces shot an unarmed woman when the crowd tried to enter the chambers themselves.
We know that the protestors brought no guns, even though they could have. We know that they generally did not bring other weapons, despite lies to the contrary. We know they engaged in no serious violence, no serious destruction of property, nor even serious looting, despite complete failure to control the crowd. We know that protesters interrupting congressional deliberations is not some unprecedented event, and in fact Blue protesters have done it repeatedly in the past. We know protesters breaking into secure areas to confront and harass congressional officials is not some unprecedented act; blue protesters have done it before, and without being shot in response.
What's the actual argument?
Sauce?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
"Insurrection" is a ridiculous way to describe J6. "Riot" is probably the most accurate, but it evokes massive BLM-style destruction, so I can understand going for something milder.
I distinguish between the rally, which was the planned event including a march to the Capitol, and the riot which grew out of it, where barricades were broken down, police were assaulted, the Capitol building was vandalized, and the Capitol and legislative officers were entered.
More options
Context Copy link
I agree that insurrection is not the right word, but neither is riot. The crowd was trying to stop the election certification, not just registering dissent.
Didn't they literally leave when asked to leave?
Anyway the goal of a riot is not "registering dissent", that's a "demonstration", "protest" or a "rally" that Nybbler used. Therefore "riot" should be perfectly fine.
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
Yes they’ve done worse (as the things described above). But here are some more:
Incarcerate a whole group of Americans based on their race.
Illegally engage in war (eg Libya).
Set up the whole fake Russia gate scandal.
Lie about WMDs to start a war.
Arguably Iran Contra.
Warrantless spying on all Americans.
I appreciate the thoroughness and earnestness of your list of stuff that presidents have done that you disapprove of, but none of those is worse than trying to overpower a presidential election after the fact with procedural trickery.
Anyway, come on. Trump is a shady guy. He always has been. Trump University was indefensible, and that's par for the course for him.
More or less shady that multiple forcible rapes, and burning multiple dozens of men, women and children alive for a PR stunt?
More options
Context Copy link
Actually, both sides of politics got involved trying to do this in Florida in 2000.
There were genuine issues at stake there. When the courts spoke, both sides accepted the result. Not even remotely comparable.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
My point isn’t that Trump isn’t shady. My point is that most presidents are shady.
And I think you are way off. If you think, for example, the President unilaterally illegally prosecuting a war (usurping a key power of congress with not even a fig leaf of congressional approval) with the far reaching impacts war can have is at least not in the same neighborhood as trying but failing to use hokey legal arguments to stay in power then I just don’t trust your judgement. Ditto with incarcerating thousands of Americans for the crime of being Japanese. Ditto conspiring with the IC to actively undermine free and fair elections in the US (that one HAS to be in the same ballpark — it is about illegally obtaining the presidency albeit more subtlety but with more success). The idea that Trump was unique just elevates current fixation on J6 over a broader historical perspective.
"But what about all this other stuff that I really disagree with...!"
I accept your opinion that it is bad, but it is a different kind of thing than shadiness.
See it really is just your opinion against mine despite you seemingly keep trying to insinuate that only I have an opinion. Agree to disagree.
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
More options
Context Copy link
I am punching him in the face but not anyone else, ergo, maybe he just has a punchable face?
If the postulate is that I plan to punch everyone in the face and also have 1000 fists so I can punch everyone in the face simultaneously, the fact that I am only punch one guy strongly calls into question whether or not I actually plan to punch everyone.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yes, because it is this one specific guy who is being prosecuted.
It's not this case, but the various public figures (including Biden) retaining classified information without being prosecuted demonstrates that's not true.
More options
Context Copy link
Or Trump is just the loudest. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
The Japanese "the nail that stands up gets pounded down" works nicely there.
The tallest poppy.
Lots of cultures like this concept.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I mean, Ken Paxton is buried in allegations, but it doesn’t seem disputed that he’s unusually shady.
More options
Context Copy link
None of those other figures are subject to the jurisdiction of blue states.
I really doubt that. I do think he is unusually hated and the rhetoric we use to describe him is off the chart heated.
Georgia wants to prosecute Trump, and that’s a red state.
Biden won Georgia - it’s purple.
More options
Context Copy link
It's the bluest county in a red state. If the case gets transferred due to Fani Willis' scandals no other DA is going to pick it up.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Trump's major cases are in Federal court or a red state. Why would the Democrats not simply cook up fraudulent Federal charges against their other political adversaries as well?
You seem to have forgotten Trump's New York case.
TheMotte has confidently assured me it's no big deal.
This isn't a rebuttal or anything, it's just specious argumentation. TheMotte does not speak with one voice - if you're going to drop a low-effort sneer, it should at least be correctly targeted*, and this isn't.
* But actually, don't drop low-effort sneers.
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
Spoken like a man who does not remember Fitzmas.
"No reasonable prosecutor would bring such charges."
If Trump were unusually shady, the absurd amounts of scrutiny and procedurally-illegitimate attacks levied against him would have destroyed him already. We can actually observe the norms that have been violated and the procedures abused in an attempt to destroy him, and compare these directly to the treatment other politicians enjoy. It seems quite clear to me that he is, in fact, not particularly shady, if what they're hitting him with is truly all they could find.
What norms have been violated in the attempts to prosecute him?
More options
Context Copy link
For the specific examples Skibboleth brings up, and the specific term 'criminal accusations', I would also point to the various DeSantis kidnapping fanfiction, or the "Abbot drowned immigrants to Texas".
Ring me back when they're charged.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link