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 think it's important to note that heads of state, being at the apex of accomplishment in the field of politics, are subject to different incentives as the average person.
For the most part, once you've reached that point, what more can you reasonably expect out of life? You already are garanteed to be able to have most of the earthly possessions you might reasonably desire, even if you did not abuse your position for personal gain, because of the inherent value of your importance and popularity, you can make millions trivially by letting a ghostwriter write a book for you, or by making a few corporate event appearances. Most of us scramble to try to make something significant out of our brief time on earth. Becoming President is significant. If I managed to do it, did what I believe to be a good job, yet after my term my opponents came to jail me, fuck it I'd off myself and go into the afterlife smiling knowing that I won at life and they can't take that away from me.
All that to say that the regular carrot and stick that keep us mere mortals from misbehaving are not really needed for them, because what's supposed to keep them honest is legacy. When you become head of state, you become someone who will be written in history books and known about centuries, quite possibly even millenias, into the future. Trying to play whack-a-mole with the million different ways a head of state could abuse his power is useless, just make sure, since you have the luxury to select them, that the people who get there are the kind who care that their entry in future encyclopedias read more like Marcus Aurelius' than Commodus'.
I propose a more likely alternative:
This is a "the moment Caesar is out of office we're prosecuting him" situation. He'll get the big brained idea to never leave office.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link