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 -
So is a cold…
You're thinking of the flu, which kills quite a few old people. And covid is worse than the flu. I don't know why right wingers want to downplay covid. Still sore about lockdowns impinging on freedoms in order to save lives, I guess. (Though I don't deny that lockdown regulations were often dumb and ham-handed).
No im not. Colds can easily turn into pneumonia which is dangerous for someone in Biden’s state.
Covid after the omni variant significantly reduced its danger.
Also lockdowns didn’t save lives. Covid response was massively disproportionate to the actual disease.
It's a bit strange how well Sweden and Florida did so well without lockdowns. Especially given Florida's disproportionately old population. I would have naively thought lockdowns would have some measurable impact on infection rates.
Lockdowns decrease activity, increase isolation, and drive fear. Humans need to move and be social.
For general health and wellbeing yes. But for specifically a respiratory virus that's deadly to old people, no.
I don’t know if that is true. If you are isolated for months at a time, that probably has a bigger impact compared to being out and about.
I’d agree with you if we are talking about weeks. But for many it wasn’t weeks.
Yes, long term isolation is so destructive in so many ways. Especially on little kids. Long lockdowns come at a very heavy price.
My confusion is they didn't also clearly reduce death by respiratory virus. I would have thought that they weren't worth the price, but indeed reduce covid deaths. But they didn't even do that.
After all this, Nancy Pelosi's plan to wander around Chinatown hugging random Chinese people is about as effective as a hard lockdown. Which literally happened in real life.
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
Yeah, sure, the lockdowns were about saving lives — unless we’re talking about Black Lives, in which case lockdowns no longer work, since The Science said that mass gatherings in order to protest/riot (but only to do those things!) are A-okay.
I will never stop being “sore” about this.
(Edited to expand/clarify: after the shitshow of contradictory statements and lies that our experts subjected us to during 2020 (e.g. masks don’t work, until they do, oh wait only KN95s do but; mass gatherings are bad, unless you’re going to have a BLM march; the vaccine prevents transmission, until it doesn’t), many right-wingers adopted a stance of epistemic learned helplessness, and decided that they wouldn’t believe anything that comes out of these experts’ mouths. Yeah, this leads to dumb conclusions occasionally like “COVID doesn’t exist”. But it’s only a rational response to the maleficence of the adults in the room.)
I’m not saying covid doesn’t exist for the record. I’m saying its potency especially after numerous variants is low.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Not really, its more like getting the flu.
Regardless, if something simple as getting the flu or covid poses a serious risk to you, you have no business being the president or presidential candidate.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link